Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 17 Apr 2018 01:31:41 +0700
From:      Eugene Grosbein <eugen@grosbein.net>
To:        Farhan Khan <khanzf@gmail.com>, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Merge vale-ctl into ifconfig(8)
Message-ID:  <5AD4EC0D.5090607@grosbein.net>
In-Reply-To: <CAFd4kYDxP0eK%2BwdKEZuCYCGq_rvvHvhbRyBPoAuPONTWtVYjxw@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <CAFd4kYDxP0eK%2BwdKEZuCYCGq_rvvHvhbRyBPoAuPONTWtVYjxw@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
17.04.2018 1:23, Farhan Khan wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> I am interested in vale(4) and see the vale-ctl
> in /usr/src/tools/tools/netmap/vale-ctl.c. Given that it affects interface
> cards and creates a virtual switch, is it appropriate to merge vale-ctl's
> behavior into ifconfig? From a cursory code review, vale-ctl opens
> /dev/netapi whereas ifconfig uses a socket(2).
> 
> Thoughts?

Please don't overweight our already bloated ifconfig.

Have you considered etherswitch(4) and etherswitchcfg(8)?





Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5AD4EC0D.5090607>