Date: Sat, 9 Jun 2012 00:37:13 -0700 From: Garrett Cooper <yanegomi@gmail.com> To: Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> Cc: hackers@freebsd.org, "Alexander V. Chernikov" <melifaro@freebsd.org>, net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ifconfig accepting hostname as ipv4 address Message-ID: <CAGH67wRE=V29ONMNsxsBGSW1jrC1BpJWG=9MMzuOdACiRHQ5AQ@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1206090922390.84632@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> References: <4FD0C1F4.2060108@FreeBSD.org> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1206090922390.84632@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Jun 9, 2012 at 12:23 AM, Wojciech Puchar
<wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> wrote:
>> input.
>> Moreover, ifconfig em0 some_valid_fqdn/MASK silently ignores it, so you
>> can't set valid CIDR address using this notation.
>>
>> Classful era has ended more than 10 years ago, do we still want to keep
>> this behavior?
>>
> were not aware of that option, and it is rather stupid option - you should
> work on addresses not names when configuring network
I agree that it's not the best configuration in the world, as it
would only work 100% if a machine had proper DNS records or a
definitive hosts file.
There are already enough bugs with static IP configurations and
hostnames as-is *I'm looking at you mountlate* -- no sense to
introduce more potentially buggy interoperability that only works in a
handful of niche cases.
Thanks,
-Garrett
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAGH67wRE=V29ONMNsxsBGSW1jrC1BpJWG=9MMzuOdACiRHQ5AQ>