From: Massimo Dal Zotto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: better /etc/init.d/network Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 22:42:09 +0200 (MEST)
> > On Sun, May 16, 1999 at 10:15:48PM +0200, Massimo Dal Zotto wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > The /etc/init.d/network script created by the debian installation is very > > > simple and not flexible enough if you need to manage complex networks with > > > many interfaces. > > > > > > I have written a generic network interface management command, net, which > > > can be used to start/stop/show/configure network interfaces, and a smarter > > > replacement for the /etc/init.d/network script. > > > ... > > > > So what is the big difference between your tool and ifconfig? Seems you > > get the same results and you don't save a lot of work... Please provide > > more details on benifits of your tool. > > > > Obviously you can do the same things with ifconfig. The difference is that > now you don't need to put all the ifconfig and route commands for your > network in one big network startup script, but instead you store only the > configuration parameters in separate config files which are used by the > new net script. Not directly related to the question above (your argument sound pretty convincing to me, I missed such features many times before), but another point to pay attention to in such a script would be to somehow make all the running daemons aware of the new/old interfaces (e.g. ntp, bind, inetd). Some daemons bind explictly to each interface and would need to be re-initialized when an interface is added/removed from the system. (<soapbox> Another point which could be solved with a common-format config file, maybe XML-based </soapbox>) Cheers, --Amos Shapira | "Of course Australia was marked for | glory, for its people had been chosen [EMAIL PROTECTED] | by the finest judges in England." | -- Anonymous