Subject: Re: Replacing the sysctl() interface.
To: Johan Danielsson <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Darren Reed <email@example.com>
Date: 06/05/2000 23:17:28
In some email I received from Johan Danielsson, sie wrote:
> Darren Reed <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > - support min/default/max/modulus(?) parameters for each sysctl entry.
> > This would let you enforce 0/1 on "boolean" sysctl entries such as
> > ip_forwarding, etc. I'm thinking about modulus so that you can
> > enforce things like u-sec timers to be in lots of 1000, etc. For
> > string types that are rw, this would be limited to default. Some
> > other properties for nodes I'm thinking of are "ownership" (based
> > on user/group) and permissions (rwxrwxrwx) so you can setup read
> > only, read-write and write only sysctl nodes.
> I think this should be done by having a function that is called when
> someone is trying to set a value. That way you can enforce arbitrary
> restrictions on values.
There are a few "specials" (such as securelevel) which would be handled
in this way, but the number of other "tuneables" for which this can be
applied weights strongly in favour of generic support.