Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

config: Explicit container namespace for uid, gid, and additionalGids #412

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 3, 2016

Conversation

wking
Copy link
Contributor

@wking wking commented Apr 29, 2016

In the degenerate case where the container does not create a user
namespace, the "container namespace" distinction is unimportant, but
the phrasing is still accurate (the container and runtime namespaces
are the same).

@wking wking mentioned this pull request Apr 29, 2016
@wking wking force-pushed the explicit-uid-namespace branch 2 times, most recently from 9348822 to 8a567d9 Compare April 29, 2016 18:02
@crosbymichael crosbymichael added this to the v0.6.0 milestone May 4, 2016
@philips
Copy link
Contributor

philips commented May 4, 2016

We should make some concrete note about userns in Linux either in the glossary or as an example here. I understand the context from the PR but the doc here is a bit insufficient.

@wking wking force-pushed the explicit-uid-namespace branch 2 times, most recently from c373fc4 to c87e78a Compare May 4, 2016 18:22
@wking
Copy link
Contributor Author

wking commented May 4, 2016

I updated docs (both in the glossary and with an explicit UID example) with 8a567d9c87e78a.

@wking
Copy link
Contributor Author

wking commented May 4, 2016

Rebased around #415 with c87e78a5ba66f9.

| *B* | *A* | 45 | 90 |
| *C* | *B* | 0 | 1 |

where the container process was launched in a new [PID namespace][pid_namespaces.7], namespace *C* (in which the container process is executing) would be the container PID namespace.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

im not sure if we want to have nested user namespace clarification / education here. Seems much better to link to the kernel pages instead http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man7/user_namespaces.7.html

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 10:23:57AM -0700, Daniel, Dao Quang Minh wrote:

im not sure if we want to have nested user namespace clarification /
education here. Seems much better to link to the kernel pages
instead http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man7/user_namespaces.7.html

I don't currently talk about user namespaces at all in this entry, and
a link to namespaces(7) is already in this section. The goal with the
changes here was to make “container namespace” a clearer idea. If the
previous docs accomplished that, then I'm fine dropping this addition
;).

@crosbymichael crosbymichael modified the milestones: v0.6.0, 1.0.0 May 25, 2016
@wking
Copy link
Contributor Author

wking commented Jun 2, 2016

On Wed, May 04, 2016 at 10:23:31AM -0700, Brandon Philips wrote:

We should make some concrete note about userns in Linux either in
the glossary or as an example here. I understand the context from
the PR but the doc here is a bit insufficient.

After a few unappealing attempts at improved docs, we backed off of
this in today's meeting 1. I rerolled back to the initial commit
and rebased it onto master with 5ba66f9 -> 8a567d9.

In the degenerate case where the container does not create a user
namespace, the "container namespace" distinction is unimportant, but
the phrasing is still accurate (the container and runtime namespaces
are the same).

Signed-off-by: W. Trevor King <wking@tremily.us>
@wking
Copy link
Contributor Author

wking commented Jun 2, 2016

On Wed, Jun 01, 2016 at 08:56:25PM -0700, W. Trevor King wrote:

I rerolled back to the initial commit and rebased it onto master
with 5ba66f9 -> 8a567d9.

Oops, 8a567d9 was before the rebase onto the current master. I just
pushed 8a567d908908d6 with the rebase.

@mrunalp
Copy link
Contributor

mrunalp commented Jun 3, 2016

LGTM

Approved with PullApprove

1 similar comment
@crosbymichael
Copy link
Member

crosbymichael commented Jun 3, 2016

LGTM

Approved with PullApprove

@crosbymichael crosbymichael merged commit 303c03a into opencontainers:master Jun 3, 2016
wking added a commit to wking/opencontainer-runtime-spec that referenced this pull request Jun 3, 2016
Through 303c03a (Merge pull request opencontainers#412 from
wking/explicit-uid-namespace, 2016-06-03).

Signed-off-by: W. Trevor King <wking@tremily.us>
vbatts pushed a commit to vbatts/oci-runtime-spec that referenced this pull request Jun 3, 2016
Through 303c03a (Merge pull request opencontainers#412 from
wking/explicit-uid-namespace, 2016-06-03).

Signed-off-by: W. Trevor King <wking@tremily.us>
@wking wking deleted the explicit-uid-namespace branch June 3, 2016 20:31
Mashimiao pushed a commit to Mashimiao/specs that referenced this pull request Aug 19, 2016
Through 303c03a (Merge pull request opencontainers#412 from
wking/explicit-uid-namespace, 2016-06-03).

Signed-off-by: W. Trevor King <wking@tremily.us>
wking added a commit to wking/opencontainer-runtime-spec that referenced this pull request Nov 14, 2016
The note is from 7c9daeb (Introducing Solaris in OCI, 2016-04-25,
opencontainers#411), but as I pointed out there [1], this is also true for Linux.
08908d6 (config: Explicit container namespace for uid, gid, and
additionalGids, 2016-04-29, opencontainers#412) landed in parallel with more
explicit namepacing for these fields, so we no longer need the
overly-specific Solaris note.

[1]: opencontainers#411 (comment)

Signed-off-by: W. Trevor King <wking@tremily.us>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants