From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jan 26 09:01:56 2005 Return-Path: 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 6BEAA16A542 for ; Wed, 26 Jan 2005 09:01:55 +0000 (GMT) Received: from acampi.inet.it (acampi.inet.it [213.92.1.165]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0CD9F43D55 for ; Wed, 26 Jan 2005 09:01:55 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from andrea@acampi.inet.it) Received: by acampi.inet.it (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 8059E20; Wed, 26 Jan 2005 10:01:53 +0100 (CET) Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 10:01:53 +0100 From: Andrea Campi To: Sam Leffler Message-ID: <20050126090152.GC8930@webcom.it> References: <20050125.101021.41686898.imp@harmony.village.org> <20050125175022.GA8667@odin.ac.hmc.edu> <20050125205142.GA8930@webcom.it> <41F6BD98.3040402@errno.com> <41F6C684.2050403@mac.com> <41F6C8E0.6030103@errno.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <41F6C8E0.6030103@errno.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Devd event from GEOM? X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 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: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 09:01:56 -0000 On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 02:32:00PM -0800, Sam Leffler wrote: > I know what zeroconf is. The original discussion was not (I thought) > about setting up "zero configuration" pieces of the network. The > discussion was about finding AP's. neighbor nodes in an IBSS network, > setting up WPA and 802.1x, etc. For this zeroconf doesn't get you very far. You're wrong, that's not what the original thread was about. I was responding to Robert: > Ah, but we do, because whatever daemon it is needs to provide unified > management of routing in the presence of multiple DHCP and link locally > configured network interfaces. I.e., when I'm switching between wireless > and wired networks, Useful Things Should Happen, and this can't currently > be properly managed by today's dhclient. Likewise, I want to always have > link local addresses configured for every network interface, and not have > things like dhclient step on them. This requires dhclient to become > substantially more mature and/or grow a lot, or it requires a new daemon. While he did mention wireless, the discussion you joined late was about "every network interface". Just to get records straight... -- Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day; teach him to use the Net and he won't bother you for weeks.