On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 11:21:08PM -0800, Doug Barton wrote: D> > Worse, this solution will ruin host's connectivity in the following D> > scenario: D> > D> > - one runs his remote server with all static configuration and strict, D> > default-to-deny firewall configuration (call this person "Eygene D> > Ryabinkin"); D> > D> > - his upstream provider tells him: listen, we're rearranging our IP D> > space and you should change IP1 to IP2; D> > D> > - administrator is busy changing the configuration of his host; his D> > plan is to substitute IP1 to IP2 everywhere and to reboot his D> > machine to cleanly acquire IP2 and continue operations; D> > D> > - he already substituted IP1 -> IP2 in rc.conf and starts poking D> > the firewall configuration, but here comes the link down event D> > due to the $PROVIDER who reconfigures his $CISCO or whatever; D> > D> > - the system ends up in an unusable state, because link up event D> > will change interface's IP, but firewall isn't ready for this D> > and isn't allowing connections to IP2, but allows them only for D> > IP1 that is already gone from the interface due to devd and netif D> > script. D> D> First, I think what you're describing is a pretty small edge case.
This case makes the suggested change unacceptable. This is a common practice to change things with ifconfig w/o modifing rc.conf, and if things go wrong then call server room personnel and ask to reboot a box. So box ma y have different configuration in rc.conf and on interfaces for a long time. Moreover, even if I got the same IP in rc.conf and on an interface, I don't want any address deletion or assignment on link event. This would be spurious messages for routing daemons. -- Totus tuus, Glebius. _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-rc To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
