Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2010 11:01:18 -0500 From: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> To: Max Laier <max@love2party.net> Cc: svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r201351 - head/sys/net Message-ID: <201001041101.18288.jhb@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <201001010635.33081.max@love2party.net> References: <200912312044.nBVKicMb003815@svn.freebsd.org> <200912311547.54045.jhb@freebsd.org> <201001010635.33081.max@love2party.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Friday 01 January 2010 12:35:33 am Max Laier wrote: > On Thursday 31 December 2009 21:47:54 John Baldwin wrote: > > On Thursday 31 December 2009 3:44:38 pm John Baldwin wrote: > > > Author: jhb > > > Date: Thu Dec 31 20:44:38 2009 > > > New Revision: 201351 > > > URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/201351 > > > > > > Log: > > > Use stricter checking to match possible vlan clones by not allowing > > > extra garbage characters around or within the tag. > > > > Previously some odd clone requests such as 'em0.102a', 'em0.10a3bc', and > > 'em0.foo.104' would have succeeded creating interfaces equivalent to > > em0.102, em0.103, and em0.104. > > The em0.foo.104 case seems quite useful, though. Maybe we can keep that > /feature/? Err, I would only find it useful for adding a '104' vlan to a 'em0.foo' interface. Otherwise it is ambiguous. Suppose you have an em0 and an em0.foo interface already, then what should em0.foo.104 do in that case? I think the only way that this auto-cloning makes sense if it is an exact match of <ether>.<vlan> as it is documented to be. -- John Baldwin
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201001041101.18288.jhb>