Peter Memishian wrote:
> Well, if the mac layer knows the name, then sure. Right now it takes
> the mip->mi_name. If the link name is somewhere in the mac handle, then
> there should be no reason why it couldn't be reported instead.
Cathy would know best, but I believe in the present Clearview UV code, the
link ID associated with each mac is stored in the mac_impl_t, and can be
mapped to its current link name through a door upcall. So yes, it should
be possible to report it and would be a nice side benefit of centralizing
the implementation.
Exactly.
Of course, right now I'm not sure the case isn't bikeshedded to death.
If this is derailed into a full PSARC case, then I give up.
-- Garrett
_______________________________________________
networking-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
