Subject: usr.sbin/route6d, or sbin/route6d
To: None <>
From: Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino <>
List: tech-net
Date: 01/10/2000 23:10:03
	Question: routed is in sbin/routed.  I've put route6d is in
	usr.sbin/route6d.  do you think this is a problem?
	(it was pointed out by  <>, and now
	I'm wonrdering)

	When I did kame-into-netbsd-current merge, my logic was like this:
	- for non-router, we have stateless autoconfiguration so we do not
	  really use "route6d -q" on non-router.  therefore, we do not need
	  route6d in /sbin.  even if /usr is mounted via nfs, we will have
	  no problem.  (assuming nfs-over-v6 is working)
	  (oops, I still need to move sysctl into /sbin...)
	- for routers, mmm, we'll have /usr in disk anyway
	- putting too many things into /sbin would be bad

	The question really goes down to:
	- do we frequently mount /usr over nfs, via nfs server in separate
	  subnet?  is it true for routers?  if it is true, we may need to 
	  move route6d to /sbin.
	- I think we really need to move sysctl into /sbin.  are you guys
	  happy with it?