Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 10:07:08AM +0000, Robert Watson wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Feb 2008, Dag-Erling Sm?rgrav wrote:
>> Robert Watson writes:
>>> We also support interface renaming... Does newbus mind if you rename t=

>>> devices in its tree?

>> I'm not sure whether you're replying to my proposal or to Julian's=20
>> interpretation / extrapolation of it... but I have no intention of=20
>> hooking interfaces into newbus. I just want a sysctl tree for struct=20
>> ifnet like we have a sysctl tree for device_t, to access interface=20
>> parameters which are not easily accessible through ifconfig.

> Hmm. When I look at net/if.c, I don't see renaming support, so perhaps=

> this was just a proposal I was thinking of and not actual code. In eithe=

> case, I think the question stands: in a world where interface renaming is=

> supported, is your plan to also rename the if.X sysctl tree created for t=

> interface? Does sysctl have a facility to do this?

I think that one way or another it should be possible to reach the
sysctl by if_index since that is the only stable way to access an
interface though out its life. I might actually suggest making that the
only way and have if.1.name be available.

-- Brooks

Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQFHvZeYXY6L6fI4GtQRAq+SAKDWoU2VUwWkotuw0L46r8 MGqzarVQCeJb+6