Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 08:56:57 +0100 From: Andre Oppermann <andre@freebsd.org> To: sthaug@nethelp.no Cc: rizzo@icir.org, julian@elischer.org, current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: if_flags usage etc. Message-ID: <43D72F49.8080304@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <20060124.231504.74682748.sthaug@nethelp.no> References: <20060124075437.B67285@xorpc.icir.org> <43D67C6E.7020403@errno.com> <43D6811D.9070309@elischer.org> <20060124.231504.74682748.sthaug@nethelp.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
sthaug@nethelp.no wrote: >>We should probably better document the interface "interface". if we are >>going to (as Sam suggests) >>do some cleanups we might as well consider what other changes should be >>put in at the same time. > > A couple of other suggestions: > > - For software routers (quagga, zebra etc.) it would be very nice to > have "link up" / "link down" notifications to the routing process(es). We have that already since 5.3 I think. You have various options for receiving notifications on this event, routing socket, kqueue, netgraph and devctl. > - One feature sorely missed (which I use a lot in my daily work with > hardware based routers) is the ability to associate a "description" > field with each interface. Note that this should be available both > for physical interfaces (Ethernet etc.) and for logical interfaces > (e.g. vlan). Struct ifnet is the same for all kinds of interfaces, so any change would make it available for everyone. And yes, this looks like a useful addition. -- Andre
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?43D72F49.8080304>