On Tue, Mar 09, 2004 at 12:48:20AM +0300, Gleb Smirnoff wrote: > On Mon, Mar 08, 2004 at 11:29:39PM +0200, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: > R> > I have one more idea. Currently we have got 3 interface nodes: ng_ether, > ng_iface, > R> > ng_eiface. 2 of them already support "getifindex" message, imagine I (or > someone else) send > R> > you patch tomorrow, which adds support to ng_eiface. OK, now all three support. > May be > R> > in future some new interface nodes will be developed. > R> > > R> > Imagine the following: you have node, which is connected to some generic > R> > interface (it doesn't know which node type exactly). This node wants to > R> > determine interface index of attached interfac. It would send 3 "getifindex" > messages with 3 > R> > different cookies. Two of messages will always fail, and one return. This is > not nice. > R> > > R> > What I suggest: create a new semi-generic cookie NGM_GENERICIFACE_COOKIE, which > will be > R> > supported by all interface nodes. Put NGM_GENERICIFACE_GETIFINDEX message under > R> > NGM_GENERICIFACE_COOKIE case brackets. If you like this idea, please reply me. > And I'll send > R> > patches. > R> > > R> How do you think "ngctl msg ng0: getifindex" works? ;) > > So, you suggest to use ASCII message in situation described above? IMHO, ASCII > messages were > invented for human interface purposes, not for node interaction. > OK, how about sending a NGM_NODEINFO message to the node, and picking up XXX for (NGM_XXX_COOKIE, NGM_XXX_GET_IFNAME) based on the returned type?
Cheers, -- Ruslan Ermilov FreeBSD committer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
