> Why? I can just as easily create a /etc/nodename that has "net0:1" > and boot my machine to respond with > > # hostname > net0:1
Have you ever seen anyone actually do that? > At least the "label" namespace doesn't pretend to be an "interface", > like logical interfaces do. The confusion with interfaces seems to stem primarily from the name itself. Had it been called an address slot (which of course is what it actually is) then I think things would be a lot less confusing. In any case, I'm not pushing for continued use of logical interfaces -- I'm just unsure we've ended up anywhere better with ipadm address labels. > the alternative is > > - not to support hostname mapping at all- several people felt this would > be a big handicap (see PSARC inception notes) > - to always do the hostname lookup- this is also perilous in that the > returned value for a delete-addr or set-addrprop could be different > than the one used at create-addr. Moreover, the "label" is used > to look up DNS for static addresses, but means something else for > dhcp/ipv6-*conf- that asymmetry is also confusing > > The advantage in having a "label" for all static addresses is that > we can now collapse all the common commands like the delete-* commands > to just one command that takes the label. I agree that's an advantage but I still think that something that looks like a hostname but is actually a new object namespace is going to cause confusion unless there is something that clearly differentiates it. -- meem
