Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2007 16:02:59 -0500 From: Dan Nelson <dnelson@allantgroup.com> To: Oliver Fromme <olli@lurza.secnetix.de> Cc: ianf@clue.co.za, brooks@freebsd.org, brueffer@freebsd.org, peterjeremy@optushome.com.au, freebsd-current@freebsd.org, thompsa@freebsd.org Subject: Re: CFT: new trunk(4) Message-ID: <20070413210259.GC11092@dan.emsphone.com> In-Reply-To: <200704131526.l3DFQxf0041914@lurza.secnetix.de> References: <20070413142416.GB4558@haakonia.hitnet.RWTH-Aachen.DE> <200704131526.l3DFQxf0041914@lurza.secnetix.de>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
In the last episode (Apr 13), Oliver Fromme said:
> Christian Brueffer wrote:
> > Andrew Thompson wrote:
> > > I can see this topic coming up again so it could save some time
> > > to rename the driver now. It would mean that we lose the naming
> > > link to the same driver in OpenBSD but you cant win em all.
> > >
> > > Some names that have been suggested are:
> > >
> > > linkag(4)
> > > agr(4)
> > > bond(4) <- same as linux
> >
> > agr(4) as I understand it sounds very restrictive to me
> > considering the different modes trunk(4) supports. I'd prefer
> > bond(4) (also a great opportunaty to add some 007 jokes to the
> > manpage :-P).
>
> Personally I also prefer bond(4). However, _if_ you choose agr(4),
> please spell it correctly as aggr(4) ("aggregation").
Solaris calls its device aggr(4), btw.
--
Dan Nelson
dnelson@allantgroup.com
help
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070413210259.GC11092>