> If you do "ifconfig -a", and see "vni0", aren't you > going to expect "snoop -d vni0" to intercept those > packets and not those from some other interface?
Given that "ifconfig -a" gives me an IP interface view and "snoop -d" works on the link layer, certainly not. > The expectation is that once a device is created (and > especially once it is visible) is that all use of that > name should refer to that name, irrespective of whether > or not it is DLPI or something else and that the system > should operate in such a way as to preserve the uniqueness > of that name. Given that the link namespace and IP namespace are distinct, that's an unreasonable expectation. All we can guarantee is that a given object will have the same name at every level it exists at (and in fact, this is stated in the original Clearview charter) -- not that the same name at every level will refer to the same object. > It would appear that there's a serious architectural > problem here that needs to be addressed. I don't see an architectural issue, just a natural consequence of multiple namespaces. The namespaces are themselves a consequence of a core design decision made long ago on Solaris (and one that I very much agree with) to separate the link-layer and the IP-layer rather than weld them together. -- meem
