Date: Fri, 08 Mar 2002 15:29:58 +0100 From: Andre Oppermann <oppermann@pipeline.ch> To: Brian Somers <brian@freebsd-services.com> Cc: Luigi Rizzo <rizzo@icir.org>, Brooks Davis <brooks@one-eyed-alien.net>, "Crist J. Clark" <cjc@FreeBSD.ORG>, Archie Cobbs <archie@dellroad.org>, Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>, freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Patches to if_loop + the interface cloning framework Message-ID: <3C88CAE6.6B5D026A@pipeline.ch> References: <200203081422.g28EMIH6060352@hak.lan.Awfulhak.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Brian Somers wrote: > > > On Mon, Mar 04, 2002 at 10:23:35AM -0800, Brooks Davis wrote: > > > From a _practical_ standpoint, a loopback interface must be compiled > > > in at this time. However, that's not what Archie and I are arguing. > > > I'm arguing that since the requirement is not there in theory, we should > > > not be making moves which require it in practice. The direction I'd like > > > > speaking of which , would it be reasonable to merge if_disc and if_loop ? > > The former is basically a stripped down version of the latter, so > > it hardly justifies a separate device > > It'd also be reasonable to have if_disc create ``discN'' devices... > ``dsN'' doesn't seem... orthogonal :*I I would prefer to call it if_null or null0. This is what the routers call it. -- Andre To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3C88CAE6.6B5D026A>