On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 08:27:19AM -0700, Sam Leffler wrote:
S> >change message will report either all state changes or those where at
S> >the time of reporting the state changed relative to the last report.
S> >The same assumption is true for the OpenIGPd we are working on at the
S> >moment.
S>
S> It is possible with the change to defer the messages to have multiple S> changes coalesced. If an app is written to assume it receives notice of S> every change and it uses this to track internal state then it can get S> confused. The issue was whether or not to communicate any coalescing to S> applications so they can recognize that it's happened. In lieu of doing S> that I asked for a console printf so we could see if it ever happened in S> practice.
Yes, all the time we are speaking about a theoretical issue. Let's see whether it can happen or not. I decided to go ahead with this change.
S> >From an (routing) application point of view only effective state changes
S> >are interesting and only those should be provided.
S> >
S> S> If an inteface does down, moves network, then comes back up and you only S> get the up event then you will likely do the wrong thing unless you have S> some other way of identifying what happened. I'm not convinced (yet) S> this cannot happen so am being cautious.
In this case you will receive additional messages, not only RTM_IFINFO. Move network will also generate RTM_NEWADDR and RTM_DELADDR
Only if someone sets the address which won't be true in the case I'm thinking of: dhclient handling a wireless nic that re-associates with a different ap. But since the dhclient I'm thinking of isn't in the tree yet I'll look at the problem myself.
Sam
_______________________________________________ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
