Peter Memishian wrote:
>  > >   * Where is show-interface?  There's a lot of useful stuff that should
>  > >     be provided from this view, like the OVER relationship for IPMP
>  > >     groups, the list of addresses for the interface, the configured MTU,
>  > >     and so forth.
>  > >   
>  > I have included a flags field for show-address and added show-interface 
>  > sample output in the doc. Isn't the list of addresses redundant 
>  > information when it can be obtained through show-addr <interface> ?
>
> Possibly, but given that an IP interface without any addresses is not very
> interesting, it's a little unfortunate to have to use multiple
> subcommands.  However, we may not have a choice given the constraints of
> the output format.
>   

Ok.

>
> Group membership is not a creation-time decision, but rather something
> that can be done at any time.  If we wanted to draw parellels with the way
> dladm handles aggregations, we'd have the ability to assign an initial set
> of IP interfaces when the IPMP group is created, and then add-ipmp and
> del-ipmp subcommands to change the members of the group.   Again, this
> makes sense if you model IPMP IP interfaces as their class of IP
> interface (i.e., there's also a create-ipmp).  (I strongly urge you to
> consider this, as it is much more consistent with dladm than what has
> been proposed thus far.)
>   

Ok. We could have a create-ipmp, add-ipmp, del-ipmp set of subcommands, 
while other classes of IP interfaces can be created with 
create-interface command (ip.tun, lo, vni, etc.)
Do we need a show-ipmp? It can show the set of test addresses, while 
show-addr will show only the data addresses for each ipmp group. Or we 
could have an extended output for show-addr to show all addresses 
including test addresses. This answers the next comment about test 
addresses too.

>  
> At least as far as IPMP goes, I'm not sure why an IPMP data address should
> be considered any different from any other type of IP address.  IPMP test
> addresses deserve some thought.  One thing to keep in mind is that as of
> Clearview IPMP, all IPMP test addresses live on underlying IP interfaces,
> and no other IP addresses ever live on underlying IP interfaces.  That is,
> in general, the address configuration for underlying IP interfaces is
> uninteresting unless you are debugging some problem with IPMP test traffic.
>   
I agree that data address should not be considered differently. I will 
update the show-addr output.

Vasumathi

Reply via email to