From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Aug 16 01:29:10 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60DBC1065691; Sun, 16 Aug 2009 01:29:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from randy@psg.com) Received: from ran.psg.com (ran.psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:1::36]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C7878FC3D; Sun, 16 Aug 2009 01:29:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=rmac.psg.com) by ran.psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.69 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1McUYO-000OsS-GL; Sun, 16 Aug 2009 01:29:00 +0000 Received: from rmac.local.psg.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rmac.psg.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 094EF29543AE; Sun, 16 Aug 2009 10:29:00 +0900 (JST) Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2009 10:29:00 +0900 Message-ID: From: Randy Bush To: sthaug@nethelp.no In-Reply-To: <20090815.214022.41662662.sthaug@nethelp.no> References: <4A8601CE.5030205@delphij.net> <4A86C782.5030808@freebsd.org> <4A86F2BE.4050203@elischer.org> <20090815.214022.41662662.sthaug@nethelp.no> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.5 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/22.3 Mule/5.0 (SAKAKI) MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.6 - "Maruoka") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sun, 16 Aug 2009 02:03:52 +0000 Cc: qing.li@bluecoat.com, brooks@freebsd.org, d@delphij.net, freebsd-net@freebsd.org, qingli@freebsd.org, andre@freebsd.org, bu7cher@yandex.ru, julian@elischer.org, bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net Subject: Re: [Take 2] Re: RFC: interface description X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2009 01:29:10 -0000 >> From my perspective, putting it in a separate db outside the kernel >> kind of defeats the purpose. I thought the first patches had the >> right idea. though for me the current ability to rename an interface >> is good enough. I mean is you can cal your interface "Sydney0" or >> "Melbourne2" that is really enough.. > Having read the discussion, I agree that the description should be > in the kernel. However, being a router geek the ability to rename > an interface to "Sydney0" or "Melbourne2" is not at all enough. For > the routers & switches I work with we really want a description of > at least 50 characters - and it's important to be able to include > space. also a router geek. but for the sake of simplicity, i am quite willing to s/\ /_/ or whatever. randy