Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2011 13:00:32 +0000 From: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net> To: Hiroki Sato <hrs@FreeBSD.org>, Hajimu UMEMOTO <ume@mahoroba.org> Cc: net@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: [RFC] resolvconf(8) interface id Message-ID: <F36DB85C-BA31-49D2-A5E0-FA001E7D6774@lists.zabbadoz.net> In-Reply-To: <20110616.142834.63956571381923731.hrs@allbsd.org> References: <20110616.015317.781291617533474654.hrs@allbsd.org> <6FE95AC6-CCB2-45B0-8347-AB31283EE144@lists.zabbadoz.net> <20110616.142834.63956571381923731.hrs@allbsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Jun 16, 2011, at 5:28 AM, Hiroki Sato wrote:
Hi Umemoto-san, Sato-san,
> Our openresolv currently supports $interface_order with shell pattern
> matching only. What I thought was
>
> interface_order="lo lo[0-9]* *:ppp *:slaac *:dhcpv4 [a-z]*[0-9]*:*"
Hmm, indeed we do and I hadn't actually thought of collapsing the two.
I think that's perfect.
The only thing I am only still pondering - do we want it to be
"slaac" "dchpv4" or the program name? I can see advantages with both.
If we go with "slaac" etc. we might need to - at least for the three or so
things from base, add a table to the man page like
program: origin
rtsol -> slaac
rtsold -> slaac
dhclient -> dhcpv4
ppp -> ppp
as people may or may not be familiar enough with what the one or the
other might mean. Maybe simply describing the cases will be good
enough as well.
I can imaging ports like mpd, ... to join this scheme and by then
there might be different "ppp" or "dhcpv4", "dhcpv6" or even different
"slaac". The advantage of this one is that if I prefer dhcpv6 on one
interface it doesn't make a difference if I am going to use dippler,
isc or wide.
So I guess I am convinced that what you have is the best.
Regards,
Bjoern
--
Bjoern A. Zeeb You have to have visions!
Stop bit received. Insert coin for new address family.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?F36DB85C-BA31-49D2-A5E0-FA001E7D6774>