From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jul 10 15:24:54 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B913316A4E2 for ; Mon, 10 Jul 2006 15:24:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sam@errno.com) Received: from ebb.errno.com (ebb.errno.com [69.12.149.25]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD53943D68 for ; Mon, 10 Jul 2006 15:24:49 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from sam@errno.com) Received: from [10.0.0.248] (trouble.errno.com [10.0.0.248]) (authenticated bits=0) by ebb.errno.com (8.13.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id k6AFOgXW087349 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 10 Jul 2006 08:24:43 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sam@errno.com) Message-ID: <44B2713A.2020204@errno.com> Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2006 08:24:42 -0700 From: Sam Leffler User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.2 (X11/20060508) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Dmitry Pryanishnikov References: <44B15511.206@errno.com> <20060710103404.I25526@atlantis.atlantis.dp.ua> In-Reply-To: <20060710103404.I25526@atlantis.atlantis.dp.ua> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.94.0.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: vlans and cloning X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2006 15:24:54 -0000 Dmitry Pryanishnikov wrote: > > Hello! > > On Sun, 9 Jul 2006, Sam Leffler wrote: >> clone operation? This would change the user api but otherwise I can see >> no reason for continuing to support the old mechanism where you do: >> >> ifconfig vlan create >> ifconfig vlan0 vlan 1 vlandev em0 >> >> Anyone _against_ nuking the above? > > Do you mean that you're going to nuke > > ifconfig vlan create > > but not > > ifconfig vlan0 create No, you can still specify the name of the cloned device. > > ? As I understand the flow of /etc/rc processing, support of the > > ifconfig vlan0 create > ifconfig vlan0 vlan 1 vlandev em0 > > sequence is required for now. Also, I thing it's perfectly correct to have > > cloned_interfaces="vlan30" > > while NOT having 'ifconfig_vlan30' assignment - system administrator > could just reserve a spare interface w/o assigning it's parameters. So I > think > that possibility of the specific device cloning w/o arguments, e.g., > > ifconfig vlan30 create > > should be preserved. Clearly one would need to fix rc scripts. The question is should the old behaviour be preserved; it provides no functionality--i.e. a cloned device is unusable until you set the tag+parent and you cannot set the tag or parent on an existing cloned device (once setup). So the only benefit to the ability to create a usable vlan device in 2 steps is to preserve existing practice. Removing the 2 step procedure would allow code to be removed and (IMO) clarify how a vlan is crafted. In the future there will be cloned devices that cannot/will-not be specified with a 2-step procedure so having vlans work this way will violate POLA. Sam