John Plocher wrote:
> Edward Pilatowicz wrote:
>> ... a bunch of good stuff, including:
>
>> hence, i think it would be benificial to have projects answer the
>> following questions wrt zones integration:
>>
>> * is the functionality delivered by this project accessible, by default,
>> directly from within non-global zones?
>>
>> * is any configuration, state, and/or statistics used by this project
>> maintained on a per-zone basis? Do any tools for accessing this
>> information allow for per-zone views of this data?
>>
>> * does any functionality deliverd by this project expose information
>> about the global zone (or other non-global zones) to a non-global
>> zone?
>
>
>
> Might I suggest that instead of adding bulk back to the 20Qs, that you
> or the zones team come up with some sort of "design pattern for
> Zones", "zones howto/bestpractice" or similar that encompasses both
> these sorts of questions as well as the "answers" that are expected to
> go along with them?
>
> For instance, what does it mean (in terms of what I need to do in my
> project) to be "accessible, by default, directly from within
> non-global zones"? etc etc etc
This should be in a document tree that is referenced by this 20Q. For
now, just adding the name "Zones" to the list of Virtualization
technologies would be a good start.
In other news, I need to put together materials for an inception
scheduled for the 29th of the month. I'd be thrilled if I could start
with this streamlined 20Q -- I'm willing to be a test case for it.
(This is for the Audio project.) If the chair and/or membership agrees,
I'll be a "beta tester" for it. Otherwise I'll do the legacy 20Q.
-- Garrett
>
> -John
>
