From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Feb 12 23:14:33 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B5B816A407 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2007 23:14:33 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jfarmer@goldsword.com) Received: from imf05aec.mail.bellsouth.net (imf05aec.mail.bellsouth.net [205.152.59.53]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0EEB813C461 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2007 23:14:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jfarmer@goldsword.com) Received: from ibm57aec.bellsouth.net ([65.13.105.239]) by imf17aec.mail.bellsouth.net with ESMTP id <20070212222546.RSDZ537.imf17aec.mail.bellsouth.net@ibm57aec.bellsouth.net> for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2007 17:25:46 -0500 Received: from [192.168.1.33] (really [65.13.105.239]) by ibm57aec.bellsouth.net with ESMTP id <20070212222545.TFZF1547.ibm57aec.bellsouth.net@[192.168.1.33]> for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2007 17:25:45 -0500 Message-ID: <45D0E98A.3010600@goldsword.com> Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 17:26:18 -0500 From: "J. T. Farmer" User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.9 (Windows/20061207) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org References: <200702121809.l1CI9rBq065457@lurza.secnetix.de> In-Reply-To: <200702121809.l1CI9rBq065457@lurza.secnetix.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: Desired behaviour of "ifconfig -alias" X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 23:14:33 -0000 Oliver Fromme wrote: > In the case of adding something, what should be added if > nothing is specified? Should the tool invent an arbitrary > IP address and add it? Now that would be nonsensical. > > But when removing something without specifying which one, > it makes some sense to simply remove the first existing > address on that interface. It would even be OK with me > to remove the last one, or an arbitrary one -- I use that > shortcut mostely when I need to remove the only address > from an interface (or all existing addresses), so it > doesn't matter. > Doing apparently random and arbitrary things is bad, regardless. To re-cast the argument, suppose you found out that your employer had a command in the company accounting system called "VacationConfig -transfer" that would transfer random days from your vacation pot to some arbitrary receiver. .. It is very clear that ifconfig does not behave in the manner that the man pages claim. Part of that appears to be simple bit-rot, part of it appears to be an issue as to what it should do. I suggest that everyone toss there ideas over to -current/hackers and forge a consensus to what ifconfig should do, and willing volunteers go off and mung the code & docs until it's that way in -current. Then MFC it back to -stable... John ------------------------------------------------------------------ John T. Farmer Owner & CTO GoldSword Systems jfarmer@goldsword.com 865-691-6498 Knoxville TN Consulting, Design, & Development of Networks & Software