jail: external and localhost distinction

[Dmitry Morozovsky]

On Fri, 6 Feb 2009, Robert Watson wrote:

RW> > Thank you for clarification, now I see this is actually expected behaviour
RW> > :)
RW> > 
RW> > Would then starting second jail with the same root and, say, 127.10.0.1 as
RW> > an address be a workaround?
RW> 
RW> There's no technical reason you can't have more than one jail using the same
RW> file system root, and even IP -- you'll find that ps(1) in one jail can't
RW> see processes in the other (and can't signal, etc) but otherwise works as
RW> expected.  Of course, any given process has to be a member of at most one of
RW> the two.

But, in the case of IP sharing, I suppose, the second process tries to bind to 
the same port will got "socket already in use", won't it?


-- 
Sincerely,
D.Marck                                     [DM5020, MCK-RIPE, DM3-RIPN]
[ FreeBSD committer:                                 marck at FreeBSD.org ]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*** Dmitry Morozovsky --- D.Marck --- Wild Woozle --- marck at rinet.ru ***
------------------------------------------------------------------------