Cathy Zhou wrote:
> Sorry that I wasn't clear. But this thread strictly talks about phase 0
> (which has already been in Nevada). Can you have a second look to see
> whether the point in this thread is valid for phase 0?
NWAM phase 0 does not know about link renaming. So I guess
what you proposed is valid. But what you change probably will
be removed for NWAM phase 1.
> Okay. I asked because I tried and found that the network/nwam service
> does exist in the local zone. It also has a function call
> lookup_zonename() in its code.
Oh, I think it is a fix to make sure that only the dhcpagent
in the zone running nwamd (which is the global zone) is killed,
not the dhcpagent in other zones. I don't think it is the
intention to run nwamd in a non-global zone. I guess John
can confirm this. The network/nwam leak to a non-global zone
is probably a bug.
--
K. Poon.
kacheong.poon at sun.com
