Peter Memishian wrote:
> Perhaps we're going over this again and again because the original spec
> wasn't detailed enough in covering all the background issues, and no one
> has been able to keep up with the subsequent email discussion. As such,
> I propose that John and I update the spec and resubmit.
>
Partly.
I believe the other thing is that many of us are having trouble
believing that this whole method is appropriate for enough cases to be
anything close to a "general solution".
I look forward to seeing an updated proposal. I hope it contains:
This proposal is specifically for dladm. The method employed may be
useful for use by other utilities, but this does not establish a
guideline or precidence.
Or something like that.
When I wish upon a star...
- jek3
