From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Oct 26 09:58:44 2005
Return-Path: <owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG>
X-Original-To: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org
Delivered-To: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E59316A41F;
	Wed, 26 Oct 2005 09:58:44 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from rwatson@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from cyrus.watson.org (cyrus.watson.org [209.31.154.42])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE8FE43D58;
	Wed, 26 Oct 2005 09:58:43 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from rwatson@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from fledge.watson.org (fledge.watson.org [209.31.154.41])
	by cyrus.watson.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 642D446B8E;
	Wed, 26 Oct 2005 05:58:43 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 10:58:43 +0100 (BST)
From: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org>
X-X-Sender: robert@fledge.watson.org
To: Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <20051026093536.GF41520@cell.sick.ru>
Message-ID: <20051026105820.X32255@fledge.watson.org>
References: <200510260557.j9Q5vZ7J076711@repoman.freebsd.org>
	<20051026101319.A32255@fledge.watson.org>
	<20051026093536.GF41520@cell.sick.ru>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, Yar Tikhiy <yar@FreeBSD.org>,
	src-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/netinet ip_carp.c
X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree <cvs-all.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all>,
	<mailto:cvs-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-all>
List-Post: <mailto:cvs-all@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cvs-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all>,
	<mailto:cvs-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 09:58:44 -0000


On Wed, 26 Oct 2005, Gleb Smirnoff wrote:

> On Wed, Oct 26, 2005 at 10:15:09AM +0100, Robert Watson wrote:
> R> I think we may actually be in need of either a new flag,
> R> IFF_OKSODONTTREATTHISQUITELIKEANINTERFACE, or maybe a more reliable way
> R> for protocols to ask if an interface is a loopback interface or not.
>
> I'd prefer to rewrite those subsystems that use interface layer but 
> aren't actually interfaces. I have plans to do this for CARP.

At least in the case of if_disc, this won't help.  I'm not quite sure why 
if_disc is IFF_LOOPBACK.

Robert N M Watson