Re: Interface type

[Roy Marples <roy%marples.name@localhost>]

On Wed, 2008-09-10 at 12:46 -0500, David Young wrote:
> Speaking for myself, under those circumstances, I want the precise
> opposite priority order to the one that you give above.  I don't think
> that it can be implemented by examining the interface type, alone.

Right, the end user should always be able to control the exact ordering.
I'm just trying to get the sane-est default (in my mind, maybe not
yours) I possibly can.

> Here is a thought: maybe you should prioritize leases instead of
> interfaces?

We already do - the exact criteria is carrier (up, unknown, down), then
lease (there or not) and finally metri (lower better, 100 + if_index,
+100 if wireless).

User can override metric in dhcpcd.conf or on the command line.

Thanks

Roy