Subject: Re: SIOCSIFADDR & co
To: Bill Studenmund <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Lennart Augustsson <email@example.com>
Date: 01/27/2000 01:35:28
Bill Studenmund wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Jan 2000 Lloyd.Parkes@vuw.ac.nz wrote:
> > On 27 Jan, Lennart Augustsson wrote:
> > > Why don't we do what FreeBSD and OpenBSD have done
> > > and break out that code into a subroutine that can be called?
> > I had noticed the same thing, but my idea was to have the common code
> > handled higher up (instead of being pushed further down into a
> > subroutine). Since I don't know how the ioctls get passed around inside
> > the kernel, and I had other things to do, I very specificly did not look
> > at whether or not the code was amenable to this.
> One reason to not do it higher up is: SIOCSIFADDR. :-)
> A problem I ran into is that atalkd, the netatalk routing daemon, will try
> to fire up appletalk on all interfaces if there's no config file.
> Guess what happens when it tries to add an atalk address on the eon
> interface, which is an ISO-over-IP tunnel. :-)
So that's a reason to do it the way I suggested. If there's a subroutine to call
when you want to do the standard thing, you just call it. Otherwise handle