From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Dec 14 00:37:01 2007
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0D1816A417
	for <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>; Fri, 14 Dec 2007 00:37:01 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from zec@imunes.net)
Received: from xaqua.tel.fer.hr (xaqua.tel.fer.hr [161.53.19.25])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91DBB13C448
	for <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>; Fri, 14 Dec 2007 00:37:01 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from zec@imunes.net)
Received: by xaqua.tel.fer.hr (Postfix, from userid 20006)
	id 963529B6C9; Fri, 14 Dec 2007 01:18:20 +0100 (CET)
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.7 (2006-10-05) on xaqua.tel.fer.hr
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.3 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00 
	autolearn=ham version=3.1.7
Received: from [192.168.200.100] (zec2.tel.fer.hr [161.53.19.79])
	by xaqua.tel.fer.hr (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE2F69B6C7
	for <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>; Fri, 14 Dec 2007 01:18:19 +0100 (CET)
From: Marko Zec <zec@imunes.net>
To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2007 01:18:16 +0100
User-Agent: KMail/1.9.7
References: <476061FD.8050500@elischer.org>
	<20071213221607.Q81630@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net>
	<4761B9CC.1020008@elischer.org>
In-Reply-To: <4761B9CC.1020008@elischer.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200712140118.16407.zec@imunes.net>
Subject: Re: bikeshed for all!
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, 14 Dec 2007 00:37:01 -0000

On Friday 14 December 2007 00:01:32 Julian Elischer wrote:
> > I'd suggest to go with any kind of spelling of 'fibid', 'fib_id',
> > 'FIBid', or ...  as that's what it is called these days.
>
> inside the kernel I'll be sticking with the rt_ prefix
> to reduce confusion. I think I'll go with the tableid name used in
> openBSD for compat reasons, and its succinct.
>
> however in the user visible portion I'm still lookig for a name for
> the utility.. (similar to nice, jail, chroot)
>
> looking for something that flows off the fingers nicely..
>
> fib 1 ping 1.1.1.1
>
> might work for me
> #
> # fib 1 sysctl net.my_fib
> 1
> #
> #
>
>
> since I've never heard of it before I don't know how standard FIB is?
>
> setfib 1 (mumble)
>
> I think the contenders are:
>
>
> Base                        short version             utility name
> ==================================================================
> instance  (ala Juniper)     inst? rtinst              rtinst
> vrf (ala cisco)                                       vrf, setvrf
> fib   ala someone else                                fib, setfib

I think with vrf / instance (Cisco / Juniper) concepts it is assumed 
that local interface addressing in each vrf is completely independent, 
whereas in your framework each local interface, regardles to which 
rt_table instance it belongs, must have a unique local IP address.  So 
you have my vote against (mis)using the terms vrf, instance, and 
perhaps even against fib.

table / rtable / rttable / tableid etc. sound like much better bikeshed 
colors to me...

Marko

> and a late contender:
>
> routes 1 ping 1.1.1.1
> (note plural)