From owner-freebsd-stable Fri Feb 15 14:11: 4 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from gromit.it.su.se (gromit.it.su.se [130.237.95.77]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B485837B405 for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2002 14:11:00 -0800 (PST) Received: (from rnyberg@localhost) by gromit.it.su.se (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g1FMAxh23349 for freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG; Fri, 15 Feb 2002 23:10:59 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from rnyberg) Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2002 23:10:59 +0100 From: Richard Nyberg To: freebsd-stable Subject: Re: Suggestion on natd rc scripts Message-ID: <20020215231058.A23326@gromit.it.su.se> Mail-Followup-To: Richard Nyberg , freebsd-stable References: <002f01c1b65d$13834bb0$1200a8c0@gsicomp.on.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: ; from freebsd@damnhippie.dyndns.org on Fri, Feb 15, 2002 at 01:38:44pm -0700 Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > I suggest that natd_interface="" be in the defaults. If you add > natd_enable=yes to your rc.conf, it is then your responsibility to set > natd_flags and/or natd_interface to something that will work for you. > > In rc.network, if natd_enable is Yes, then it validates that either (or > both) of natd_flags and natd_interface have non-empty values. If so, it > starts natd. If natd_enable is Yes and both flags and interface are empty, > it whines and doesn't start natd. > > The only downside I can see to this change is that people who currently have > Intel Etherexpress NICs and have just natd_enable=yes in their rc.conf would > have to add natd_interface=fxp0 as part of their next upgrade. Everyone > else is already going to have a natd_interface= in their rc.conf > and nothing would need to change. And those of us who want to specify the > interface in our natd.conf files will have the option of doing so and will > be able to remove the natd_interface= from our rc.conf. All of the above is exactly what I thought, and thus totally correct ;) > Who decided that Intel NICs should get primacy over other brands in this > case anyway? Were payoffs involved? Was pressure brought to bear? Do we > need the ISU to investigate? :-) I wondered about that too. -Richard To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message