From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Aug 27 22:37:19 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F32C416A4CE for ; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 22:37:18 +0000 (GMT) Received: from c00l3r.networx.ch (c00l3r.networx.ch [62.48.2.2]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3601643D39 for ; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 22:37:18 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from andre@freebsd.org) Received: (qmail 60976 invoked from network); 27 Aug 2004 22:35:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO freebsd.org) ([62.48.0.53]) (envelope-sender ) by c00l3r.networx.ch (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 27 Aug 2004 22:35:52 -0000 Message-ID: <412FB7A0.E6801EA6@freebsd.org> Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 00:37:20 +0200 From: Andre Oppermann X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.8 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Roman Kurakin References: <20040827200532.GE22253@odin.ac.hmc.edu> <412F94BC.6360DC17@freebsd.org> <412FB259.5000200@cronyx.ru> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: proposed new if_data variable X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 22:37:19 -0000 Roman Kurakin wrote: > > Andre Oppermann: > > >Brooks Davis wrote: > > > > > >>I'd like to proposed adding a new variable, ifi_epoch, to struct > >>if_data. It will be set to the time the counters were zeroed, > >>currently, the time if_attach was called. The intent is to provide a > >>correct value for RFC2233's ifCounterDiscontinuityTime and to make it > >>easier for applications to verify that the interface they are looking at > >>is the same one that had this index last time. > >> > >>Since this will increase the size of struct if_data and thus struct > >>ifnet, the change needs to be made now if it's going to be made for > >>5-STABLE. Any comments on this idea? > >> > >> > > > >I'm all for it! Very useful. > > > This could be other reason to bump version ... I have bumped version to 600001 today due to the permanent pfil_hooks. You can use that if you wish. -- Andre