On 10/02/2014 10:45 AM, Robin Sommer wrote: > (Taking this to bro-dev for discussion.) > > On Wed, Oct 01, 2014 at 22:31 -0500, Daniel wrote for > https://bro-tracker.atlassian.net/browse/BIT-1267: > >> Using a different class (instead of SafeConfigParser) from the >> ConfigParser module seems to fix the problem. > > Seems I hit another prefix separator that already had a meaning. :) > > SafeConfigParser implements some interpolation features using % as the > control character. I don't think we're using that anywhere, so it > might be fine; on the other hand the docs say: > > Derived class of ConfigParser that implements a more-sane variant > of the magical interpolation feature. This implementation is more > predictable as well. New applications should prefer this version > if they don’t need to be compatible with older versions of > Python." > > So we can either ignore that, or change the prefix separator once > more. If we did the latter, any idea what would be a good one? As a > reminder, the problem is specifying the packet source plugin to use > with an interface, e.g., currently you'd say "-i netmap%eth1" to > monitor eth1 via the netmap plugin. It used to be "-i netmap:eth1" but > that conflicts with some BPF devices that use the colon already. So, > what would be better than ':' or '%', both visually and in terms of > not conflicting with existing interface naming conventions? > > Robin
Just out of curiosity, I'm wondering why it was implemented as a prefix to the interface name, as opposed to just specifying the packet source with a different cmd-line option? (for example: bro --pktsrc netmap -i eth0) Is it expected that someone will want to do something like this: bro -i netmap:eth0 -i pcap:eth1 _______________________________________________ bro-dev mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.icsi.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/bro-dev
