Date: Sat, 4 Oct 2003 00:25:43 +0200 From: Pawel Malachowski <pawmal-posting@freebsd.lublin.pl> To: Brooks Davis <brooks@one-eyed-alien.net> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: TEST PLEASE: if_tun patch Message-ID: <20031003222543.GA70798@shellma.zin.lublin.pl> In-Reply-To: <20030930221705.GC14082@Odin.AC.HMC.Edu> References: <92028.1064699839@critter.freebsd.dk> <20030929050442.GA20995@Odin.AC.HMC.Edu> <20030930213534.GA26486@shellma.zin.lublin.pl> <20030930221705.GC14082@Odin.AC.HMC.Edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Sep 30, 2003 at 03:17:05PM -0700, Brooks Davis wrote: > > It looks strange to have `ifconfig create' vlan interface on tap, > > while tap uses different semantics and can disappear after closing it? > > With ef it is even worse, pseudo-devices are created while ef is > > starting, so ef module must be loaded after creating every ethernet > > device. > > That's really evil. :-) > > The proper fix for the vanishing tap is probably some standard way for > parents to know who their children are so they can hunt then down and > notify them that they are being orphaned when they die. What the device > would do it up to it since some devices like vlan and ef devices might > as well die off, but an etherchannel device should just stop sending > things to that interface. I like to have all tun/tap interfaces to exist on my system, whether they are opened or not. Interface list is constant, what makes me and my stats more happy, same about firewall rules (rc.d/ppp calls ipfilter resync for example, this would be a bit inconvenient to do the same for 20 /dev/tun). I would like my tun/tap interface *not to* disappear entirely when device is closed, uless I manually do something like ifconfig tun0 destroy. :) > For ef, I'm thinking of expanding cloning so that we pass the requested > name to each cloner for tasting and it decides if it can do that. Then > vlans would be created and configured by doing something like: > > ifconfig fxp0.10 create > > and you could come up with a similar syntax for ef by appending f# to > any ethernet's name to get the appropriate frame interface. A corrected > form of the existing behavior could easily be implemented in userland by > devd. Sounds very sensible. -- Paweł Małachowski
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20031003222543.GA70798>