Messages in this thread | | | From | (Eric W. Biederman) | Date | Fri, 26 Sep 2014 12:34:16 -0700 | Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v2 0/5] netns: allow to identify peer netns |
| |
David Ahern <lxhacker68@gmail.com> writes:
> On 9/26/14, 7:40 AM, Nicolas Dichtel wrote: >>> >>> >>> No, I don't want to monitor anything. Even if I wanted, I would just >>> start one >>> daemon in each netns instead of one for all. >> Ok you don't want, but some other people (not only me) want it! And >> having one >> daemon per netns does not scale: there are scenarii with thousand netns >> which >> are dynamically created and deleted. > > An example of the scaling problem using quagga (old but still seems to be a > relevant data point): > > > https://lists.quagga.net/pipermail/quagga-users/2010-February/011351.html > > "2k VRFs that would be 2.6G" > > And that does not include the overhead of each namespace -- roughly > 200kB/namespace on one kernel I checked (v3.10). So that's a ballpark of 3G of > memory.
Resetting the conversation just a little bit.
When I wrote the "ip netns" support I never expected that all applications would want to run in a specific network namespace. All that is needed is one socket per network namespace.
Furthermore one socket or one procesess per network namespaces is completely orthogonal to the patches presented. I do not see a identifying where the far end of a veth pair or similar set of networking objects as anything that even closely resembles a path to a using only a single socket.
So I think this whole subthread is quite silly and grossly off track.
Eric
| |