On Nov 11, 2007, at 11:53 AM, Gergely CZUCZY wrote:
On Sun, Nov 11, 2007 at 06:02:56PM +0100, Soeren Straarup wrote:
On Sat, 10 Nov 2007 22:17:18 -0800 (PST)
Doug Barton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mon, 5 Nov 2007, Bob Johnson wrote:
On 11/5/07, Mike Makonnen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Most IP related knobs will have an ipv4_ and ipv6_ version. To
make the transition easier rc.subr(8) will "automagically" DTRT
for the following knobs:
gateway_enable => ipv4_gateway_enable
router_enable => ipv4_router_enable
router => ipv4_router
router_flags => ipv4_router_flags
defaultrouter => ipv4_defaultrouter
static_routes => ipv4_static_routes
static_routes_<IF> => ipv4_static_routes_<IF>
route_<XXX> => ipv4_route_<XXX>
dhclient_program => ipv4_dhclient_program
dhclient_flags => ipv4_dhclient_flags
dhclient_flags_<IF> => ipv4_dhclient_flags_<IF>
background_dhclient_<IF> => ipv4_background_dhclient_<IF>
Please try it and let me know what you think.
Personally, I'd prefer the new names be along the lines of
ifconfig_<interface>_ipv4, ifconfig_<interface>_ipv6,
defaultrouter_ipv4, defaultrouter_ipv6, dhclient_program_ipv4,
dhclient_program_ipv6, etc.
Personally I think that grouping things by ipv4/ipv6 makes more
sense, and has better longevity.
And this would be a good time to change defaultrouter to
default_router!
Or we could make it shorter and call it gateway.
Well there is a difference between router and gateway.
I think that gateway would be a better word since from my
understanding that is what people use today.
+1 vote for the "gateway". I always wandered why it's called
"router", since "gateway" would be a more proper name for it.
+1 vote for "gateway".
-----
Eric F Crist
Secure Computing Networks
_______________________________________________
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
