Re: RFC: new network config (was: Re: network configuration)
On Mon, Feb 08, 1999 at 06:47:39PM +0000, Christian Hammers wrote:
> If no one objects I will start writing the /etc/init.d/interfaces and
> /etc/interfaces (template) this or tomorrow's evening. (And will post a
> first version thursday evening)
> Before people will start a religion-war about the syntax, I will simply
> implement both ways.
good compromise :-)
> Regarding the floppy package. Since it left us with even no awk and
> sed, I propose I write a fine perl script for the netbase package
> (or if netbase can - for which reason ever - not depend on perl in
> Shellscript) and one cute,little script that does just the basic tasks
> for the floppy package.
if you use perl for boot-time scripts in /etc/init.d, make sure it works
with just perl-base and doesn't need the full perl package. not everyone
installs perl and, (crazy as it may seem :-) not everyone WANTS perl
this is the correct thing to do, and it may even be policy (i can't
> > - my virtual-services package does everything else needed for virtual
> > host service provision, including running ifconfig for ip_alias
> > addresses.
> If someone thinks that the ifconfig part would better be in netbase,
> mail me, then I add it to the parser
i can think of arguments for and against, and don't mind either way.
on the one hand, the virtual-services package will need some data in
common with netbase.
on the other hand, netbase is low level network configuration stuff
whereas virtual-services will be high-level config generator scripts
which don't get run at boot time, they get run when the system admin
wants to re-generate their httpd/ftpd/whatever config after making some
it probably makes sense for the ip_alias ifconfig stuff to be in a
separate script (most likely in the netbase package - because netbase
shouldn't have to depend on virtual-services), which can be called from
both netbase and from virtual-services so that alias interfaces can be
dynamically created/uncreated as needed without rebooting and without
interfering with existing routes or non-alias interfaces.
as long as there is some co-ordination between the two packages to avoid
conflicts and incompatibilities there should be no problem :-)
(Question: is there any/much use for alias interfaces if you're NOT
running virtual hosting services like httpd or ftpd?)
> BTW: Can I assume that everybody will use a kernel greater 1.3.100 ?
> (kernel sets some routes automatically nowadays !)
you could use 'uname -r' to detect the kernel version and have conditional
behaviour depending on version.