Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2009 10:16:47 -0700 From: Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org> To: d@delphij.net Cc: freebsd-rc@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [RFC] script for binding ARP <-> IP pairs Message-ID: <4A941C7F.2070503@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <4A933B77.7030108@delphij.net> References: <4A7B2792.4090803@delphij.net> <4A7B487B.8060303@FreeBSD.org> <4A7F948A.2040602@delphij.net> <4A7F9EC6.9090605@FreeBSD.org> <4A7FAA42.4030607@delphij.net> <alpine.BSF.2.00.0908092234390.50801@qbhto.arg> <78cb3d3f0908101113s412021adk8956dd083a8fed72@mail.gmail.com> <4A806D17.9020404@delphij.net> <4A933294.8000906@delphij.net> <4A93351E.2020107@FreeBSD.org> <4A933B77.7030108@delphij.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Xin LI wrote:
> Doug Barton wrote:
>> Xin LI wrote:
>>> Any objections for the attached patch? I'll commit this version if
>>> everybody is happy with it and then see if re@ would approve it for
>>> 8.0-RELEASE.
>> Sorry if I wasn't clear before, but all of the rc.conf variables
>> should be prepended with static_arp_ (as opposed to just arp_). So
>> rather than arp_args you'd want static_arp_args. I realize you're not
>> using set_rcvar() but it's still a good idea to do that for
>> consistency's sake, as well as to make it easier for admins to sort
>> stuff, etc. Please make sure you change that in the man page as well.
>
> I see. I have corrected arp_ prefixes to static_arp_ prefixes. Note
> that "arp_args" are not changed because they are intermediate variables
> that are intended as "arp(1) arguments". I have marked these as local.
That look great, commit it when you are ready. :)
>> Other than that it looks fine to me.
>
>> Silly question that I'm sorry just occurred to me right now, have you
>> tested this with IPv6? :)
>
> I think IPv6 would need to use "ndp" instead (cross referenced from
> arp(8)) but am not sure. Because the script rely on space or tab as
> separator I think it would just work after a simple s/arp/ndp/g for ndp
> but I don't have a local production IPv6 network for the test...
Sorry, I had intended that as a joke since in general we're trying to
achieve parity in IPv6 for the features in IPv4. Looking back it's not
even that funny to me anymore .... :)
Doug
--
This .signature sanitized for your protection
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4A941C7F.2070503>