On (03/05/08 15:10), Peter Memishian wrote: > > > > This all seems reasonable for what's proposed, but I wonder how it might > > > be extended to handle an additional case that's come up in another > thread. > > > In particular, ndd currently allows one to effectively change the default > > > value, > > > > Not sure I follow- could you provide an example? At least for datalink > > drivers, afaik, ndd allows one to set or get values (typically the MII > > parameters), and the "default" here is intended to be the value > > that the driver would come up with when it attaches. > > I'm not talking specifically about drivers, but about ndd in general. As > we were recently discussing, most of the IP ndd tunables effectively > change the per-stack default. I think that same concept has merit at the > datalink layer and as such I was hoping our design could account for that
I think there are a lot of items that may not be transferrable to the TCP/IP model. It's still not clear if all the TCP/IP tunables can really be tied to a linkid, for example. Moreover, the ndd model is still just the simple pair of set and get operations, and to reset a default paramter "foo", one needs a parameter called "foo-default". > (But given that this is consolidation private at this > point, we have time to evolve this.) right. --Sowmini
