Peter Memishian wrote:
> > Has anybody run into any issues the dladm model of persistent&missing?
>
> Given the prevalence of "-t" in dladm subcommands (and other subcommands
> that are always temporary such as connect-wifi), the offered model seems a
> bit more complex than that. We can hope that no one is using "-t" ...
I wasn't asking about dladm in general; I was solely asking whether
there are issues around dladm handling persistent object the way it does
- allowing them to go missing.
Erik
_______________________________________________
networking-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
