Date: Tue, 02 Jun 2009 10:39:59 -0700 From: Sam Leffler <sam@freebsd.org> To: Matthew Seaman <m.seaman@infracaninophile.co.uk> Cc: Brooks Davis <brooks@freebsd.org>, freebsd-rc@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Removal of deprecation for network_interfaces != AUTO Message-ID: <4A2563EF.4050502@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <4A2560CB.4030307@infracaninophile.co.uk> References: <4A21A4F6.5060709@dougbarton.us> <20090601212506.GA2351@lor.one-eyed-alien.net> <4A24B99B.9050703@infracaninophile.co.uk> <20090602155403.GF14685@lor.one-eyed-alien.net> <4A254EFB.2020001@freebsd.org> <4A2560CB.4030307@infracaninophile.co.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Matthew Seaman wrote:
> Sam Leffler wrote:
>> Brooks Davis wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 06:33:15AM +0100, Matthew Seaman wrote:
>>>
>>>> Brooks Davis wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> I've never seen a valid use case, just failures to understand the
>>>>> current system.
>>>>>
>>>> My laptop has iwi0 and bge0 interfaces. At work, both of these obtain
>>>> addresses and default routes by DHCP, but from two completely
>>>> different DHCP
>>>> servers. When I'm plugged into the wired network I want the bge0
>>>> interface to
>>>> be the default route, but iwi0 comes first in the list of
>>>> interfaces produced
>>>> by ifconfig, so it gets configured first and sets the route. Of
>>>> course, when
>>>> I'm not plugged into the wired network I want iwi0 to have the
>>>> default route,
>>>> so I can't just use dhclient.conf to disregard routing information
>>>> on that
>>>> interface.
>>>>
>>>> All in all, setting network_interfaces="bge0 iwi0 lo0" does exactly
>>>> what I
>>>> want with minimal effort.
>>>>
>>>
>>> This is an interesting use case. This is certainly the easiest way
>>> to do this in 7. FYI, it won't work by default in 8.0 because we
>>> only run dhclient from devd so there is no ordering unless you set
>>> synchronous_dhclient="YES". What I've been thinking here is that we
>>> should have a way to tell dhclient which interface(s) to prefer for a
>>> default route. I've been meaning to fix that for a while, but since
>>> I've been using a cardbus wireless device, I've not needed to scratch
>>> that itch.
>>>
>> Some people prefer to use lagg's failover handling to handle the
>> wired-wireless switchover.
>
> How does that work if the two interfaces are in entirely different
> networks?
> Can you trigger an arbitrary action (such as modifying the routing table)
> when a lagg interface fails over?
Sorry, didn't read your note well enough. I don't think lagg is
applicable to your setup.
Sam
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4A2563EF.4050502>