Hi Neels,
On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 11:39:06AM +0100, Neels Hofmeyr wrote:
Holger has just refreshed my memory on a conversation
we've had on running
multiple NITB instances on the same box: Linux Network Namespaces vs.
making NITB configurable.
Kindly remind me of the immediate plans, should we make osmo-nitb
configurable to bind on only specific IP addresses, like, now?
yes, I think that would be very useful.
IIUC that would be a VTY item for osmo-nitb and a
parameter into
libosmo-abis. Concerning the VTY, the port could be configurable, or the
IP address, thinking of 127.0.0.42.
also don't forget the control interface.
Furthermore, the unix domain sockets for rf_control and for MNCC need to
be configurable, too. Ah, I just see it already is by means of the '-r'
command line argument.
In general I prefer things being configured via VTY paramters over
command line arguments.
I guess relying on `ip netns` would be quicker for
now, and I'd have
slightly more time for IuCS.
I'm not sure this solves the general problem, and it is of course highly
Linux-specific. For an all-IP NITB there currently is no strict Linux
dependency.
I would say maing the addresses configurable seems reasonably
straight-forward to do it right now. It shouldn't take much time, or am
I missing something?
--
- Harald Welte <laforge(a)gnumonks.org>
http://laforge.gnumonks.org/
============================================================================
"Privacy in residential applications is a desirable marketing option."
(ETSI EN 300 175-7 Ch. A6)