[Lxc-users] regarding lxc "states" available to lxc-monitor or lxc-wait usage

[Serge Hallyn]

Quoting brian mullan (bmullan.mail at gmail.com):
> So given that a socket approach could work... would it make sense if there
> was some sort of standardized method employed for reading/writing etc.

Could work, but it's not pretty.  I'd suggest if you want to do this,
you bind mount the unix sock file using lxc.mount.entry into the
container.

Mark, where do you keep them?

> It would be beneficial if there was some sort of documented standard that
> people could use so everyone that develops an app for a container could
> report via lxc-monitor or lxc-wait a private-state that is understood
> or could be used by anyone?
> 
> 
> On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 12:36 PM, Serge Hallyn <serge.hallyn at ubuntu.com>wrote:
> 
> > Quoting Vallevand, Mark K (Mark.Vallevand at UNISYS.com):
> > > Actually, I've had good success using Unix domain named sockets for
> > communications between programs in containers and host.  Perhaps they are
> > in a shared name space.  But, don't change it.  :-)  It works.
> >
> > Right.  Abstract unix domain sockets shouldn't work across network
> > namespaces, but regular ones do as they're controlled by the file
> > space.  Agreed, don't want those changed :)
> >
> > -serge
> >