On 22-Nov-2001 Niels Möller wrote: > philippe brochard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> but I think it's a good thing if we can run it with an unprivileged user. > > I'm not sure if there's any sensible way to delegate control over just > some parts of the networking (e.g different network interfaces), but > until someone comes up with a good model for that, it should be > possible to delegate control over all networkish things by changing > the owner of /servers/socket/2, and adding that uid to users or > processes you want to be able to control the networking. > > Some questions (which is why I'm adding bug-hurd to the recipients): > > 1. Has anybody thought about partial delegation of networking? Does > that make sense at all? > > 2. Is the group of /servers/socket/2 relevant, or should it be? To me, it > seems cleaner to add network admins to a special group than using a > special network-admin uid. > > 3. Is there a reasonable way to give a user additional uid:s > automatically at login? > > (On second thought, you probably have to change the owner and > permission on some other nodes as well, to make sure that pfinet gets > access to ethernet hardware and stuff. And then one should probably > think a little about what a "privileged (< 1024) port means when > pfinet doesn't run as root. This seems a little harier than I'd > like). > > Regards, > /Niels
I think just that I don't want to become root to start ppp, but all the users don't have to start ppp, maybe just some on a specific group. Regards, -- Philippe Brochard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://hocwp.free.fr _______________________________________________ Bug-hurd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-hurd
