On Wed, Mar 14, 2007 at 04:17:51PM -0400, Sebastien Roy wrote: > Implementing this is not trivial, which led me to the question of > whether this flexibility (not requiring a link name) is at all useful. > I'd actually prefer having the link name be a required part of the > create-* subcommands of dladm.
Requiring a link name as an argument pushes (some of) the burden of managing the link namespace onto the caller. This is an irritation, as the caller has to deal with collisions, racing creators, etc. Replicate that code in a couple of places and you're pretty sure to end up with brokenness in one of them. I'd _much_ rather have (the option of) the tools choose a name. dme.
