On Fri, Mar 24, 2006 at 10:42:50AM +0100, Quentin Garnier wrote:
> While the patch itself had a number of issues, one which is probably the
> most relevant is that it used a fictive SIOCSLIFADDR.  itojun argued
> that this ioctl was never defined because KAME wanted Add/Delete
> semantics for address manipulations (for any family) and not a Set one.

Just to point to existing solutions: FreeBSD and DragonFly have an ioctl
SIOCSIFLLADDR to alter the link-layer address. While I agree that having
add/delete semantic is useful, the primary link-layer address is IMO
special and should be threated as such.

Joerg