On Mon, Jul 07, 2008 at 12:40:38PM -0400, James Carlson wrote: > Nicolas Williams writes: > > That's _very_ different from what I was looking for! > > OK. At least at first look, that's what it appeared to be, and I'm no > "ad" expert or user. :-/ > > If it's more like translating an instance name from some other naming > scheme, I'd be wary of that. Having a way to treat the other scheme's > name as a property and providing a way for administrators to give > short instance names sounds like an easier-to-support plan to me. > > It'd be interesting to be able to do something like this: > > svcadm enable svc:/network/dns/server:foobar.com > > ... to mean "enable queries for domain foobar.com in the local DNS > server," but I suspect that's exposing just too much internal (and > abstract) detail to SMF.
That's it. David convinces me that SMF is not the right place for this. Although I suppose we could use private SMF repositories as a backend, but without exposing that to users nor applications -- this might save us some effort if it turns out that the property typing and multiplicity properties of SMF are useful to us.
