svn commit: r336731 - projects/bectl/sbin/bectl

[Kyle Evans]

On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 9:17 AM, Rodney W. Grimes
<freebsd at pdx.rh.cn85.dnsmgr.net> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 8:32 AM, Rodney W. Grimes
>> <freebsd at pdx.rh.cn85.dnsmgr.net> wrote:
>> > -- Start of PGP signed section.
>> >> On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 04:07:37AM +0000, Kyle Evans wrote:
>> >> > Author: kevans
>> >> > Date: Thu Jul 26 04:07:36 2018
>> >> > New Revision: 336731
>> >> > URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/336731
>> >> >
>> >> > Log:
>> >> >   bectl(8): Redo jail using jail(3) API
>> >> >
>> >> >   The jail is created with allow.mount, allow.mount.devfs, and
>> >> >   enforce_statfs=1. Upon creation, we immediately attach, chdir to "/", and
>> >> >   drop the user into a shell inside the jail.
>> >> >
>> >> >   The default IP for this is arbitrarily 10.20.30.40.
>> >>
>> >> It seems this would only allow working in a single jailed BE at a
>> >> time, correct?
>> >
>> > Also it is just bad practice to use arbitrary IP's from
>> > rfc1918 space.   IMHO it would be better to pick a
>> > rfc3927 link local address, or one of the rfc5737 test
>> > network addresses.
>> >
>> > Please see RFC5735 page 6, table in section 4, no
>> > place in FreeBSD base system should we be shipping
>> > stuff that uses rfc1918, that is private space that
>> > does not belong to the OS.
>> >
>>
>> Right on both accounts (Shawn + Rod)... I changed it from an arbitrary
>> IP in 192.168/16 space that was conflicting with my local network
>> (heh... that was fun) with the intent of later changing it to just be
>> configurable rather than hard-coding an IP [1] because I think that no
>> matter what choice I try to go with, someone's going to want something
>> else. I'd rather not make such choices at all and force you to instead
>> specify an IP every time, a la "bectl jail testenv 10.8.0.100".
>>
>> The default remains 10.20.30.40 until that time, though, and it seemed
>> that anyone wanting to test this should be aware.
>
> Can you make it just unconfigured instead?  I really am strongly
> pressing the point that we should never ever commit rfc1918 addresses
> to the repository.

Right, like I said- force the user to specify on the command-line what
they want.

> Some address in 192.168/16 conflicted with your network,
> some address in 10/8 conflicts with my network, and probably others.
>
> If you do anything stick a 169.254 on it.  That is after all what
> link locals are for.
>
>> [1] see the "XXX TODO" I dropped in the area, which mentions the
>> former and meant to hint at the latter
>>
>
> --
> Rod Grimes                                                 rgrimes at freebsd.org