From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Jun 17 12:19:25 2011
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: net@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F200106566C;
	Fri, 17 Jun 2011 12:19:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from "."@babolo.ru)
Received: from smtp1.babolo.ru (smtp1.babolo.ru [195.9.14.139])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90B1B8FC1B;
	Fri, 17 Jun 2011 12:19:24 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from cicuta.babolo.ru ([194.58.246.5])
	by smtp1.babolo.ru (8.14.2/8.14.2) with SMTP id p5HC0Jjs042415;
	Fri, 17 Jun 2011 16:00:20 +0400 (MSD) (envelope-from .@babolo.ru)
Received: (nullmailer pid 74965 invoked by uid 136);
	Fri, 17 Jun 2011 12:05:35 -0000
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2011 16:05:35 +0400
From: Aleksandr A Babaylov <.@babolo.ru>
To: Hiroki Sato <hrs@freebsd.org>
Message-ID: <20110617120535.GA74911@babolo.ru>
References: <20110616.015317.781291617533474654.hrs@allbsd.org>
	<20110617022950.GA58034@DataIX.net>
	<20110617.124029.722784011683540958.hrs@allbsd.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20110617.124029.722784011683540958.hrs@allbsd.org>
Cc: jhell@DataIX.net, net@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Dynamin/Static Resolver Table [netstat like]
X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD <freebsd-net.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
	<mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-net>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-net@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
	<mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2011 12:19:25 -0000

On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 12:40:29PM +0900, Hiroki Sato wrote:
> jhell <jhell@DataIX.net> wrote
>   in <20110617022950.GA58034@DataIX.net>:
> 
> jh> Gosh, Wouldnt it be something if we could store our dynamic resolver
> jh> information with the interface in the same sort of fashion that we store
> jh> our routing tables ? and then modify our routines in the library to look
> jh> them up via the "resolving tables" and think of resolv.conf as static
> jh> routing information only ?
> jh>
> jh> If we can already do this via resolvconf(8) in order to modify
> jh> resolv.conf how hard would it be to adjust to move in this direction ?
> 
> jhell <jhell@DataIX.net> wrote
>   in <20110617023358.GB58034@DataIX.net>:
> 
> jh> I appologize for the insta-reply, but thinking more along the lines of
> jh> this it may come as even more of a benefit to tie this more into the
> jh> routing table so so each route can have a dynamic nameserver attached to
> jh> it so when setfib(8) is used a whole nother batch of nameserver could
> jh> also be used or fall back to the standard resolv.conf.
> 
>  I am not sure of the benefit to adopt "same sort of fashion as the
>  routing table" for RDNSS entries.  What is your problem, and how does
>  your idea solve it?
I think jhell's idea is overkill,
but I like mount root read only.
Symlinks are not beautiful.