> BTW, any thoughts on how bridgeutils will be used by the bootscripts? > As nice as my script was, it did require 2 seperate ifconfig.br0 > files. (Well, easier w/ Qrux's changes, but we wouldn't want to add > support for every variation of network addresses into the bind script > [dhcp, ipv4, ipv6]). > > perhaps, something like > BRIDGE="eth0,eth1" > > with the logic programmed into ifup/ifdown, That way, any network > service script can use this feature if bridge-utils is installed (and > give a friendly warning if it is not installed) > > (I don't like the idea of network specific code in ifup/ifdown, but it > feels right for bridging. My alternative suggestion would be to add > it to each & every service script [which I vote against]). service > scripts were designed to setup an address onto an existing interface. > > > > As an alternative (but I think this may be overkill), I wonder if > bringing up interfaces in 2 stages would be worth it... 1) prep or > create interface (such as br0), 2) setup address (such as dhcp > configured IPV4). > /etc/sysconfig/network-devices/ifconfig.br0 > INTERFACE=bridge > BRIDGE="eth0,eth1" > SERVICE=dhcp > > it would first run /lib/services/bridge, then run /lib/services/dhcp
The values in a script are just bash variables. We might want to support something like: SERVICE="bridge ipv4-static" and call the services in that sequence. That would require changes to ifup and ifdown, but not a lot. I haven't thought it trough yet, but it may work. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
