http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=12567
Renee Danson Sommerfeld <renee.danson at sun.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |renee.danson at sun.com
--- Comment #7 from Renee Danson Sommerfeld <renee.danson at sun.com>
2009-11-10 19:08:25 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> (In reply to comment #5)
> >
> > I think the fix should activate the NoNet location only if there are no "ncu
> > foo is-not active" conditions.
>
> Isn't there a danger though that a user will then create an "ncu foo is-not
> active" conditional location with NIS as the nameservice? I think we probably
> want to enforce application of the NoNet location as a policy to prevent users
> getting into broken states. I don't think that doing this is even too damaging
> to cases where the user specifies "ncu foo is-not active", because the
> majority
> of the time the user will want the condition to apply when other ncus are
> active, but not the one in question. If the user wants to specify location
> configuration parameters when no NCUs are active, they have the option of
> editing the NoNet location also.
I agree with Alan's concerns, and I think the ability to change NoNet is a
reasonable fall-back if someone really wants specific behavior when no networks
are available (that's why we made that location read-write).
One way of explaining it would be: the NoNet location has very specific
activation conditions: it is activated when all interface NCUs are offline.
The example of a user-specified location with activation conditional on one
particular NCU being offline is, in a sense, less specific. It's also likely
that there's an expectation that *something else* is online at that point.
I think reverting the change made for 10860 is the right way to go.
--
Configure bugmail: http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
