Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2015 18:19:15 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 197270] [Patch] Improve output of ifconfig command Message-ID: <bug-197270-8-4BFTrJP7tF@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-197270-8@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-197270-8@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=197270 --- Comment #15 from Andrey V. Elsukov <ae@FreeBSD.org> --- (In reply to Hiroki Sato from comment #8) > Also, RFC 4007 specifies that at least non-negative decimal integer > SHOULD be supported as scope zone id. We support it. However, if > removing the scopeid part, it becomes difficult to know the zone id. Zone id is printed in the same line before "prefixlen" keyword. You can just copy an address with %zone_id and use it where you want. And I'm sure you are doing so. > This is the reason why scopeid is displayed along with %zone_id. > A symbolic "%zone_id" itself means "it is non-global". > Is "scope: link" still needed? So, why this zone index is formatted in hex? We don't support hexadecimal values. It looks like many people use them every day... :) > Putting the above aside, I do not think it is a good idea to change > the command line output because it breaks consistency > (e.g. ifmcstat(8) also uses scopeid notation) and compatibility of ifmcstat(8) also has this redundant information. > scripts which depend on it, for example. scopeid has lived for 10+ > years. While adding "scope: link" or something may be acceptable, > replacing scopeid with it does not look a good improvement, at least > to me. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-197270-8-4BFTrJP7tF>