On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 11:56:26AM +0100, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote: > On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 11:40:26PM -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 12:08:07PM +1000, NeilBrown wrote: > > > On Fri, Sep 22 2017, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > > > Rather than a flag, it might work to use network namespaces. > > > Very early in the init sequence the filesystem gets mounted using the > > > IPv6 link-local address on a client->host interface, and then a new > > > network namespace is created which does not include that interface, and > > > which everything else including firewall code runs in. Maybe. > > > > That seems closer, since it allows you to hide the interface from most > > of the guest while letting some special software--qemu guest agent?-- > > still work with it. That agent would also need to be the one to do the > > mount, and would need to be able to make that mount usable to the rest > > of the guest. > > > > Sounds doable to me? > > > > There's still the problem of the paranoid security bureaucracy. > > > > It should be pretty easy to demonstrate that the host only allows > > point-to-point traffic on these interfaces. I'd hope that that, plus > > the appeal of the feature, would be enough to win out in the end. This > > is not a class of problem that I have experience dealing with, though! > > Programs wishing to use host<->guest networking might still need the > main network namespace for UNIX domain sockets and other communication. > > For example, the QEMU guest agent has a command to report the IP > addresses of the guest. It must access the main network namespace to > collect this information while using a host<->guest socket to > communicate with the hypervisor. > > I think this can be achieved as follows: > 1. open /proc/self/ns/net (stash the file descriptor) > 2. open /var/run/netns/hvnet & call setns(2) to switch namespaces > 3. socket(AF_INET6, SOCK_STREAM, 0) to create host<->guest socket > 4. call setns(2) to switch back to main namespace > > In other words, the program stays mostly in the main network namespace > and only enters the host<->guest namespace to create sockets. Sounds like it would work. Or use two communicating processes, one in each namespace? > setns(2) with a network namespace requires CAP_SYS_ADMIN so it's not > very practical. The guest agent will need root to do NFS mounts. > Is there an alternative that makes using the host<->guest network > namespace less clunky? You'll have to define "clunky" for us.... --b. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
