From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jul 28 02:08:23 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3253C16A420; Thu, 28 Jul 2005 02:08:23 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from sam@errno.com) Received: from ebb.errno.com (ebb.errno.com [66.127.85.87]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D323043D49; Thu, 28 Jul 2005 02:08:22 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from sam@errno.com) Received: from [66.127.85.91] ([66.127.85.91]) (authenticated bits=0) by ebb.errno.com (8.12.9/8.12.6) with ESMTP id j6S28Ims075142 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 27 Jul 2005 19:08:20 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sam@errno.com) Message-ID: <42E83F5B.7000700@errno.com> Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2005 19:13:47 -0700 From: Sam Leffler User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (X11/20050327) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: David Gilbert References: <42E583F9.3070703@rogers.com> <200507261853.07513.peter@wemm.org> <1242.172.16.0.199.1122429678.squirrel@172.16.0.1> <200507271215.14369.doconnor@gsoft.com.au> <42E6F5EA.7030801@samsco.org> <42E71F77.6010705@FreeBSD.org> <17127.41923.312257.159166@canoe.dclg.ca> <42E82F2E.9030505@errno.com> In-Reply-To: <42E82F2E.9030505@errno.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Mike Jakubik , Doug Barton , Peter Wemm , freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: dhclient sucks X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2005 02:08:23 -0000 Sam Leffler wrote: > David Gilbert wrote: > >> The ISC dhclient would probe multiple interfaces simultaneously. The >> new one waits for some amount o ftime on my hardwire ethernet (rarely >> used) before probing my wireless. The result is a longer startup. I misread the above. I saw brooks pointed out the "don't wait at startup" option and you responded that this was unacceptable. I don't see your proposing an alternative except to revert to the isc code which right now we're not looking to do. Sam