From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bakul Shah Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) Message-Id: <061CE1AC-FA6E-4EE4-B6C5-49E1B45C56A4@bitblocks.com> Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2016 10:15:16 -0700 References: <3cc25353d73631c0fcf0ab1e30a417f5@felloff.net> <57C9E70E.6040308@gmail.com> <20160902210942.A8668124AEB2@mail.bitblocks.com> <20160902220026.4D53F124AEB2@mail.bitblocks.com> <6DC9B45D-7BBD-4DED-9A4B-B5827A90E698@orthanc.ca> In-Reply-To: <6DC9B45D-7BBD-4DED-9A4B-B5827A90E698@orthanc.ca> To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Subject: Re: [9fans] Plan9 and VMs Topicbox-Message-UUID: 9cd66b4e-ead9-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 > On Sep 2, 2016, at 4:02 PM, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: >=20 >=20 >> On Sep 2, 2016, at 3:00 PM, Bakul Shah wrote: >>=20 >> Separately, an interesting project would be to implement plan9 >> sandboxes (ala linux "containers" or freebsd "jails)" so that >> one can easily set up a cluster of plan9 boxes. >=20 > Namespaces would make that an easy application, no? There is no required u= ser/kernel interface in 9P, so why not? Namespaces solve part of the problem. For better isolation you'd need more. C= an multiple sandboxes share the same physical network while maintaining thei= r own IP address? Can one sandbox hog all memory or all CPUs or all network b= andwidth or all disk space?=20=