On (05/12/10 22:52), Girish Moodalbail wrote: > > If the daemon associated with the ip-interface-management service is used to > configure above addresses on zone boot and address object names were not > explicitly provided then an address object name will be generated for that > address by the daemon. > > Therefore in your examples above you will never see '?' and instead you will > see address object names, starting with '_', such as vnic0/_a, vnic0/_b, et > al. So the example above has to be corrected.
Actually no. this is deep into implementation details, but since ipmgmtd is calling libipadm, and we don't want to recurse back into libipadm for name-space verification (this is done early on, before any doors are set up so that no other application can invoke ipmgmtd), whether an addrobj name is provided or not is an implementation choice. We could either 1. have ipmgmtd provide an addrobj name, in which case it would have to make function calls to set up the addrobj names 2. not provide any name at all. In either case the library has to be modified to not recurse back into libipadm, which is ok, since this particular configuration method is guaranteed to have no ipadm name-space collision. I've chosen #2 but we could revisit #1 when code review comes around. I don't think this impacts ARC review though. > There is a difference between vnic0/? and vnic0/_a. vnic0/? means that the > address was created outside libipadm/ipmgmtd and therefore cannot be managed > by ipadm(1M) (ipadm show-addrprop, set-addrprop and reset-addrprop). However > vnic0/_a can be managed by ipadm. > > ~Girish _______________________________________________ opensolaris-arc mailing list [email protected]
