Sowmini.Varadhan at Sun.COM writes: > Did you want to see this in the 20q.txt (some of it is there in > answer to the question "what are the clients over which a change > should be managed", but I could provide more details if you feel > it is needed (without confusing the deliverables associated with > 2007/429 itself).
Either the 20q or the design would be fine. It didn't seem clear enough to me that we're trying to get rid of ndd's use for this purpose, or how we're telling users to make the switch. You could do something like this in the interface table: ndd on drivers Obsolete replace with dladm ... and then include an update to the ndd man page and the release notes that indicates what users should do. Bonus points for making ndd issue warnings when used in the now-obsolete manner. I think the questionable part here is actually the timing of this message and exactly what the message will say. Perhaps it's too early to be directing people to use dladm instead of ndd when this project integrates ... ? The design document seems to focus on the mechanics of making the compatibility bits work. That makes sense, but it doesn't explain what we want users to do. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking <james.d.carlson at sun.com> Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677
