From nobody Sat Dec 11 18:57:10 2021 X-Original-To: freebsd-hackers@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C17B18CBDE3 for ; Sat, 11 Dec 2021 18:57:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from eugen@grosbein.net) Received: from hz.grosbein.net (hz.grosbein.net [IPv6:2a01:4f8:c2c:26d8::2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "hz.grosbein.net", Issuer "hz.grosbein.net" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4JBH8V6Xngz4spc; Sat, 11 Dec 2021 18:57:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from eugen@grosbein.net) Received: from eg.sd.rdtc.ru (root@eg.sd.rdtc.ru [62.231.161.221] (may be forged)) by hz.grosbein.net (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 1BBIvMwG068166 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Sat, 11 Dec 2021 18:57:23 GMT (envelope-from eugen@grosbein.net) X-Envelope-From: eugen@grosbein.net X-Envelope-To: jamie@freebsd.org Received: from [10.58.0.10] (dadvw [10.58.0.10]) by eg.sd.rdtc.ru (8.16.1/8.16.1) with ESMTPS id 1BBIvMk8041339 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NOT); Sun, 12 Dec 2021 01:57:22 +0700 (+07) (envelope-from eugen@grosbein.net) Subject: Re: What to use in place of abstract unix sockets? To: James Gritton , freebsd-hackers References: <58874E76-8541-46BF-A197-C984D6A869DF@dons.net.au> <2c4d62457377d7bde6a0fbad1050ef8e@freebsd.org> Cc: Gleb Popov , "Daniel O'Connor" , Konstantin Belousov From: Eugene Grosbein Message-ID: Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2021 01:57:10 +0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 List-Id: Technical discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-hackers List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <2c4d62457377d7bde6a0fbad1050ef8e@freebsd.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,SHORTCIRCUIT autolearn=disabled version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Report: * -0.0 SHORTCIRCUIT No description available. * -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on hz.grosbein.net X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4JBH8V6Xngz4spc X-Spamd-Bar: ---- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; none X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.00 / 15.00]; REPLY(-4.00)[] X-Spam: Yes X-ThisMailContainsUnwantedMimeParts: N 12.12.2021 0:57, James Gritton wrote: > On 2021-12-11 08:55, Konstantin Belousov wrote: >> That said, implementing 'abstract' unix socket addresses would be nice. > > Though if that were to happen, I would want to separate the namespaces > of the abstract sockets. This seems an analog to the POSIX shm > pseudo-file namespace, which has similar names that aren't really > files (though they still follow a file-like naming scheme). > > And then we'd be back where we are now, with a way to add a socket to > a jail's namespace, but requiring per-jail sockets (because there is > no abstract namespace hard-link). It would still be usable for chrooted application as opposed to jailed. As for jails, we could introduce new jail attribute that makes it abstract socket namespace isolated or shared with global one.