On 03/10/09 11:47, James Carlson wrote: > Sowmini.Varadhan at Sun.COM writes: > >> On (03/10/09 11:14), James Carlson wrote: >> >>> One consideration is what to do with "ndd -set" on the global >>> variable. With ip_forwarding, in addition to the global flag used for >>> subsequent new interfaces, we also go out and blast all of the >>> existing interfaces to the new setting. >>> >>> That makes the design more like my 5(a): the interface just has a >>> simple copy of the value created at plumb time, and you can set it on >>> a per-interface basis if you want. >>> >>> I dunno if that's better or worse than 5(b). It might be close to the >>> noise. >>> >> I like 5(b) better. If someone has been knowledgable enough >> to set the per-interface version of the prop, ndd should not go >> and clobber that. >> > > OK. Well what if the end user sets the property using ipadm on all interfaces, as in:
ipadm set-prop -m ip ip_def_ttl=128 Note: Currently for 'ipadm' you can either specify interface name or you don't. If you specify the interface name it will be for that property. But if you do specify then it's for all the interfaces. In that case we should allow it to be effected on all the interfaces, right? Shouldn't that hold good with 'ndd' too? ~Girish -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/brussels-dev/attachments/20090310/209e4312/attachment.html>
