Sowmini.Varadhan at Sun.COM wrote: > On (01/13/09 03:10), Darren Reed wrote: > ... >> And similarly, consider that IPMP things should be left to the >> ipmp tools? >> > > Yes, that was something that crossed my mind too. However, > if we are going to allow some of these settings from ipadm > (e.g., the nofailover flag), then in the interest of being > symmetric, it would be nice to have some basic information > displayed in the corresponding ipadm show-* sub-command. >
I'd be tempted to draw the line at the flags, otherwise you're on a slipperly slope whereby future work on IPMP needs to be done on both tools. If this were to be remodeled, would things like the nofailover flag be a part of the generic flags for an interface or would they belong in a sub structure/field that was owned by IPMP? >> What sort of administrative interface is being planned to >> manage the IPv6 scope? >> > > Can you clarify what exactly you have in mind here? In > general, we follow the ietf standards/informational rfc's here > but perhaps you have something specific in mind? > Do you plan on making it possible to view the scope - or do more- with ipadm? >> And I'd back Alan Maguire's call for a "-t"... the libipadm needs to >> support this anyway, in order to properly provide stubs for ifconfig >> (which does nothing in a persistent fashion.) >> > > but is this non-persistent usage actually useful? One can > simulate the same thing by doing a 'ipadm delete-interface' > at any point. > > One solution is to mandate that all options on a targetted > interface-object must be either all-persistent or all-temporary, > so that the mix-and-match of "-t" will return an error. > Yes - but it is an example that rubs both ways... If I unplug my laptop from network A, plug it into B, I may need to change some things using ifconfig today. If it has been running on battery and runs out of juice, what should it do when you again plug it into either A or B? Lets assume that one of the two isn't using DHCP and that my normal network that I'm attached to is A. If I used "-t" and on powerup I reattach to B, then I need to reassert that command. If I didn't use "-t" (eg not available), then I don't. If "-t" isn't available and the next network I attach to is A, I'm forced to reconfigure the laptop. I suppose so long as ifconfig(1M) always has a temporary affect on the configuration, it isn't necessary for ipadm to do so too. Darren
