Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 17:03:14 -0500 From: Brooks Davis <brooks@one-eyed-alien.net> To: Fredrik Lindberg <fli+freebsd-net@shapeshifter.se> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, Pat Lashley <patl+freebsd@volant.org>, Doug Barton <dougb@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Zeroconfig and Multicast DNS Message-ID: <20060824220314.GB40213@lor.one-eyed-alien.net> In-Reply-To: <44EE1F7B.5000500@shapeshifter.se> References: <AC7E9152833F0BCEA60635E7@garrett.local> <44EE1F7B.5000500@shapeshifter.se>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--1LKvkjL3sHcu1TtY Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Aug 24, 2006 at 11:51:55PM +0200, Fredrik Lindberg wrote: > Pat Lashley wrote: > > > >The problem with that is that we want to support the use of both on the= =20 > >same link. So we'd either need to allow more than one keyword, or have= =20 > >'DHCP', 'LLA', 'LLA+DHCP', etc. Neither of those is very attractive. I= =20 > >think it would be cleaner to have something like: >=20 > The magic words aren't mutually exclusive, they are dealt with > individually. They could be named LLA4, LLA4FALLBACK and will > work together with the other options (DHCP, WPA, etc). It just occured to me that the daemon could handle this without any interaction with dhclient or the static interface configuration. In the mode where you only want an LLA if there isn't another address it's a simple matter of watching the routing socket for messages and a) removing the LLA if an IPv4 address other than 0.0.0.0 is configured on the interface and b) (re)starting the process of obtaining an LLA when all other addresses have been removed. The daemon should be listening to the routing socket anyway because it should only run when the interface has link which requires it to exit when the link goes down similar to dhclient. I really need to go look at the code and see what you're doing now. :) > > ipv4-link-local-always=3D"bge* fxp1" > > ipv4-link-local-fallback=3D"fxp0" >=20 > I find this scheme way too different from how other interface > configuration is done. Me too. I like the tags (obviously since I invented most of them :). I'm attempting to get rid of as many lists of interfaces as possible. -- Brooks --1LKvkjL3sHcu1TtY Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFE7iIiXY6L6fI4GtQRAkrUAKDXtIvlUeQDQ0XpyOXHj9BxvjSxZgCgnthv ACtjAFzGdYRIBrRZb445+Ik= =q0EA -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --1LKvkjL3sHcu1TtY--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060824220314.GB40213>