[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: set loginterface
you just don't get it. It is entirely useless.
EVERYBODY understands that, except for you.
On Sun, Mar 09, 2003 at 05:49:41PM +0100, Cedric Berger wrote:
> Henning Brauer wrote:
> >Obviously, nobody of you has thought through the consequences of collecting
> >the stats on each interface.
> How do you know such a thing?
> As I said, I've a patch that did that in the past, for 3.0
> or 3.1. So obviously I know something about the
> consequences on the code.
> However, I'm not saying we need to do it. I don't know.
> You're raising some good points. Yor example, 'pfctl -si'
> would clearly need to take an extra argument, like 'pfctl -si fxp0'
> Yes, this will make the kernel a bit more complicated,
> but also note that it will make the userland simpler. i.e,
> "set loginterface" end friend could can go AWAY.
> We can surely have a good discussion about the plus
> and minuses of doing that, but with sentenses like
> "I do not want this bloat in pf", it is difficult to have
> a healthy discussion.
> Personally, I like orthogonality. If loginterface is useless,
> why not killing it? if loginterface is useful, why restricting
> to one interface?
> I guess the question we need to know is the how ppl
> use that feature, and for what. I've no hard feeling about
> implementing that or not, but if ppl find it useful, I don't
> think it's impossible to implement cleanly.