Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 09:15:17 +0100 From: Andre Oppermann <andre@freebsd.org> To: Milan Obuch <current@dino.sk> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: if_flags usage etc. Message-ID: <43D73395.1020003@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <200601250903.01941.current@dino.sk> References: <20060124075437.B67285@xorpc.icir.org> <20060124.231504.74682748.sthaug@nethelp.no> <43D72F49.8080304@freebsd.org> <200601250903.01941.current@dino.sk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Milan Obuch wrote: > On Wednesday 25 January 2006 08:56, Andre Oppermann wrote: > >>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. >>> > ... > >>>- 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. > > See archives - mailing list freebsd-net, Nov 25. 2005, subject ifconfig > description. Interesting. Ideally it would not use a static sized buffer for the description but a pointer in struct ifnet to a malloc()ed block of memory. This would allow for arbitrary sized descriptions. Haven't looked at the difficulties implementing the this for the userland/kernel crossing though. -- Andre
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?43D73395.1020003>