From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Feb 11 01:35:38 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A61EA16A401 for ; Sun, 11 Feb 2007 01:35:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bms@FreeBSD.org) Received: from out5.smtp.messagingengine.com (out5.smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.29]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73FA113C441 for ; Sun, 11 Feb 2007 01:35:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bms@FreeBSD.org) Received: from out1.internal (unknown [10.202.2.149]) by out1.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A66DF1A9FA6; Sat, 10 Feb 2007 20:35:36 -0500 (EST) Received: from heartbeat1.messagingengine.com ([10.202.2.160]) by out1.internal (MEProxy); Sat, 10 Feb 2007 20:35:36 -0500 X-Sasl-enc: qG9HT9W95Q+Eaqf9Z1GBYXfpHO7aNFM9UXzhj3sSldK0 1171157736 Received: from [192.168.123.18] (82-35-112-254.cable.ubr07.dals.blueyonder.co.uk [82.35.112.254]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D65012A520; Sat, 10 Feb 2007 20:35:35 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <45CE72E7.5030409@FreeBSD.org> Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2007 01:35:35 +0000 From: "Bruce M. Simpson" User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.9 (X11/20070125) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ian Smith References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Kevin Way , Jeremy Chadwick , Brooks Davis , freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Desired behaviour of "ifconfig -alias" X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2007 01:35:38 -0000 Ian Smith wrote: > Does not 'remove the network address specified' imply that this should > fail if a) there is no network address specified or b) the address that > is specified is not an existing alias address for the interface? > I tend towards disallowing -alias without argument for reasons of consistency and for the reasons of preventing foot-shooting as you describe. This is not the first time we've run into problems with ifconfig(8) arguments. > Secondly, pardon my ignorance, but what does 'NS' refer to here? That > string / term occurs nowhere else in ifconfig(8). > Old Xerox comms protocols. > Perhaps I'm missing a valid (and used) usage of -alias with no address? > I touched ifconfig.8 last. I'm very happy to check in a patch from somebody. Kind regards, BMS