On Wed, 2009-09-02 at 10:49 -0400, Sebastien Roy wrote: > On Wed, 2009-09-02 at 09:23 -0400, Sowmini.Varadhan at Sun.COM wrote: > > I'm ok with -l, -d as well, but another option is to follow the > > getsubopt(3C) model of -a local=<addr>[,remote=<addr>]. > > I like that much better, yes. One would then have the option of setting > the remote address independently by using "-a remote=<addr>". Quite > nice.
On a related note, what is the correct way to represent the above syntax in documentation and usage synopses? Consider the following possibly incorrect create-iptun syntax: dladm create-iptun [-t] -T <type> [-a local=<laddr>,remote=<raddr>] <link> It's possibly incorrect because when -a is specified, either local or remote or both need to be included. So they're simultaneously optional and not optional... -Seb
