Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2012 19:57:02 +0100 From: Dirk Engling <erdgeist@erdgeist.org> Cc: freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Proposal ipv6_addrs_common Message-ID: <4F3173FE.4020901@erdgeist.org> In-Reply-To: <20120207.232417.487789017555472392.hrs@allbsd.org> References: <20120207.072925.1861639312875773760.hrs@allbsd.org> <4F3088C8.9090505@erdgeist.org> <20120207.170255.161251905285915806.hrs@allbsd.org> <20120207.232417.487789017555472392.hrs@allbsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 07.02.12 15:24, Hiroki Sato wrote:
> Comments are welcome. I am moving onto implementing address range
> expansion to this framework.
I noticed that in ipv4_down and ipv6_down first the aliases are taken
down from the interface with the ifalias and ipv4_addrs_common function.
Afterwards every single ip address is deleted in the loop calling
ifconfig ${_if} ${_inet} delete
Actually the order first was reversed: every address was taken down in
the loop and only then did the code try to remove the addresses it
configured with the _alias functions.
Why first remove them chirurgical before killing the whole patient?
Did I miss anything?
erdgeist
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin)
iEYEARECAAYFAk8xc/4ACgkQuN1wFypsMNPTuwCghycrPZryDFF5AhjWINTJNHTF
kocAniZ08A7+BUtobjt01AhKc35HcSMW
=5YfA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4F3173FE.4020901>