Re: better /etc/init.d/network
From: Massimo Dal Zotto <dz@nikita.wizard.net>
Subject: Re: better /etc/init.d/network
Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 22:42:09 +0200 (MEST)
> > On Sun, May 16, 1999 at 10:15:48PM +0200, Massimo Dal Zotto wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > The /etc/init.d/network script created by the debian installation is very
> > > simple and not flexible enough if you need to manage complex networks with
> > > many interfaces.
> > >
> > > I have written a generic network interface management command, net, which
> > > can be used to start/stop/show/configure network interfaces, and a smarter
> > > replacement for the /etc/init.d/network script.
> > > ...
> >
> > So what is the big difference between your tool and ifconfig? Seems you
> > get the same results and you don't save a lot of work... Please provide
> > more details on benifits of your tool.
> >
>
> Obviously you can do the same things with ifconfig. The difference is that
> now you don't need to put all the ifconfig and route commands for your
> network in one big network startup script, but instead you store only the
> configuration parameters in separate config files which are used by the
> new net script.
Not directly related to the question above (your argument sound pretty
convincing to me, I missed such features many times before), but
another point to pay attention to in such a script would be to somehow
make all the running daemons aware of the new/old interfaces
(e.g. ntp, bind, inetd). Some daemons bind explictly to each
interface and would need to be re-initialized when an interface is
added/removed from the system.
(<soapbox> Another point which could be solved with a common-format
config file, maybe XML-based </soapbox>)
Cheers,
--Amos Shapira | "Of course Australia was marked for
| glory, for its people had been chosen
amos@gezernet.co.il | by the finest judges in England."
| -- Anonymous
Reply to: