On Tue, 2014-05-06 at 03:27 +0000, Serge Hallyn wrote: > Quoting James Bottomley (James.Bottomley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx): > > >> Right, but when the contaner has an audit namespace, that namespace > > >has > > >> a name, > > > > > >What ns has a name? > > > > The netns for instance. > > And what is its name? As I think you know ip netns list will show you all of them. The way they're applied is via mapped files in /var/run/netns/ which hold the names. > The only name I know that we could log in an > audit message is the /proc/self/ns/net inode number (which does not > suffice) OK, so I think this is the confusion: You're thinking the container itself doesn't know what name the namespace has been given by the system, all it knows is the inode number corresponding to a file which it may or may not be able to see, right? I'm thinking that the system that set up the container gave those files names and usually they're the same name for all the namespaces. The point is that the orchestration system (whatever set up the container) will be responsible for the migration. It will be the thing that has a unique handle for the container. The handle is usually ascii representable, either a human readable name or some uuid/guid. It's that handle that we should be using to prefix the audit message, so when you set up an audit namespace, it gets supplied with a prefix string corresponding to the well known name for the container. This is the string we'd preserve across migration as part of the audit namespace state ... so the audit messages all correlate to the container wherever it's migrated to; no need to do complex tracking of changes to serial numbers. > > > The audit ns can be tied to 50 pid namespaces, and > > >we > > >want to log which pidns is responsible for something. > > > > > >If you mean the pidns has a name, that's the problem... it does not, > > >it > > >only has a inode # which may later be re-use. > > > > I still think there's a miscommunication somewhere: I believe you just need a stable id to tie the audit to, so why not just give the audit namespace a name like net? The id would then be durable across migrations. > > Maybe this is where we're confusing each other - I'm not talking > about giving the audit ns a name. I'm talking about being able to > identify the other namespaces inside an audit message. In a way > that (a) is unique across bare metals' entire uptime, and (b) > can be tracked across migrations. OK, so that is different from what I'm thinking. I'm thinking unique name for migrateable entity, you want a unique name for each component of the migrateable entity? My instinct still tells me the orchestration system is going to have a unique identifier for each different sub container. However, I have to point out that a serial number isn't what you want either if you really mean bare metal. We do a lot of deployments where the containers run in a hypervisor, there the serial numbers won't be unique per box (only per vm) and we'll have to do vm correlation separately. whereas a scheme which allows the orchestration system to supply the names would still be unique in that situation. James _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
