Date: Sun, 22 Aug 1999 16:14:54 -0700 From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@zippy.cdrom.com> To: Brian Somers <brian@Awfulhak.org> Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: libalias or libnat. Vote ? Message-ID: <3843.935363694@localhost> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 23 Aug 1999 00:02:16 BST." <199908222302.AAA45172@keep.lan.Awfulhak.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> As of a few days ago, ppp(8) supports the -nat flag (as well as > the -alias flag for backwards compatibility), however, it's not > clear that we really want to go the whole hog and change the > library name & interface too. I've been on both sides of this issue, to be sure, but I have to say that looking at it now, I can't see any reason to change the actual name of the library right now unless we're also going to go whole-hog and change the API functions to PacketNATFoo() and such, something that would only really make sense (or be worth the effort, anyway) if we had a bunch of improvements to bring in at the same time, e.g. a significant rearchitecting effort. If we don't have anything like that planned, then simply changing the user visible flags and man pages to strongly encourage use of -nat style options rather than the deprecated -alias ones will probably be enough of a step in the right direction for now. - Jordan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3843.935363694>