On 26/03/09 08:43 AM, Sowmini.Varadhan at Sun.COM wrote: > To summarize, > > the model being proposed is > > - ipadm create-interface will only create a "virtual object" with > no underlying plumbing done at the time.. > > - ipadm add-address will plumb as needed. > > There are some aspects to consider here. > > - Persistent property retrieval: in the existing design, this was > intended to be done after plumbing, as part of create-interface. > But if we move plumbing into "add-address", then the property > retrieval has to move to that piece either. > > Possibly not a major issue, but something to keep in mind. > > - IPv6: turnin gon ADDRCONF (and/or dhcpv6) Jim Carlson, Ken Powell and > I were just having a hallway conversation about various solutions > possible for this.. one interesting point that Jim brought up is > that the target of "add-address" should be the "address" and not the > interface (just as the target of 'dladm create-secobj' is the secobj). > > If we go with that concept, then the last item on the *-address > sub-commands should be the address itself, with the link being > either an argument (e.g., -l), or embedded into the address argument. > > Some examples that Jim and I discussed are desdribed below. Here the > "address" is identified as <interface>:<numeric tag>, so the interface > is embedded in the address. Eventually each of these commands should > support an alpha-numeric tag, but a starting point would be numeric tags.. > > # ipadm add-address -o ipv6-addrconf[,ipv6-intf-id = foo] link0 > -> turn on ipv6 addrconf on the address link0:0 (i.e., the > 0'th logical address on the link), with optional intf id foo >
If "ipv6-intf-id" must come after "ipv6-addrconf" then there is no need to call it "ipv6-intf-id", "intf-id" will do. btw, is this the same as the IPv6 scope identifier? I'm somewhat balking at using "intf", it looks gross. > # ipadm modify-address -o no-ipv6-addrconf link0 > -> turn off ipv6 addrconf on the default address link0:0 > > # ipadm modify-address -o dhcpv6 link0:1 > turn on dhcpv6 on the address "link0:1" > > IPv6 allows interesting possibilities like: > > # ipadm modify-address -o flags=UP fe80::1%link0 > > Would it be worthwhile to extrapolate this for ipv4 as well? For example, > > # ipadm modify-address -o flags=UP 10.20.30.40%link0 > No. Use of "%link0" is established practise for IPv6 and is documented in various RFCs. Similar syntax is not supported for IPv4, nor is it required. Darren
