> The reason is two-fold. > > First, the administrative semantics are different. With v4, you'll > get per-logical interface notifications, while with v6, you won't. > (Or, more precisely: the v6 notification will supply the name of the > interface used for control, and won't give you the name of the > individual logical interface plumbed or unplumbed by dhcpagent because > it's not an administrative unit.) > > But the second reason is the most important one: it wouldn't be > compatible. Existing eventhook scripts aren't aware that this third > argument exists, so they don't know that they need to do anything > special. If I added a third argument, then it would run the risk of > having those existing scripts do unexpected things.
Would it be reasonable to make the V4 and V6 action/event names distinct? e.g., have each V6 event name end in a "_V6" or "6"? -- meem _______________________________________________ networking-discuss mailing list [email protected]
