On Fri, Aug 06, 1999 at 03:11:38PM +0200, Rene Mayrhofer wrote:
> New options/interfaces/address families can be added by writing a .defn
> file, if I understood you correctly.
New address families (like ipx or IPv6 instead of IP) need a new .defn file;
new methods for bringing up an interface in an old address family (ISDN
connections, say) just need modifications to an existing .defn file. But
yeah, that's the idea.
> However, do you have any objections against bringing a little bit more
> structure into the grammer ? There can be any syntax, but I would like
> to have it structured. Because then it would be easy to read the
> configuration data from a XML file or from Wichert's configuration
> management system. What do you think ?
I suspect the main thing that could do with enhancing is the .defn
file grammar. Working out a convenient way of properly dealing with ppp
and ISDN might be better with a different structure, and it'd be nice
if options weren't simply text substitutions, so that 192.168.0.1/24
could be correctly translated to IP, netmask and network automagically.
I'm not really sure what you mean by bringing a little more structure into
it. I'm somewhat inclined against structure that's not immediately needed
and useful, on the instinct that it might prove annoying when we later
find out that additional structure *is* necessary, but that it's not the
structure we tried first. I can probably be persuaded otherwise though.
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. PGP encrypted mail preferred.
``The thing is: trying to be too generic is EVIL. It's stupid, it
results in slower code, and it results in more bugs.''
-- Linus Torvalds
Attachment:
pgpWkT2Be4xZw.pgp
Description: PGP signature