svn commit: r238622 - head/etc/rc.d

[Maksim Yevmenkin]

On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 1:55 PM, Hiroki Sato <hrs at freebsd.org> wrote:
> Maksim Yevmenkin <emax at FreeBSD.org> wrote
>   in <201207191536.q6JFabOR094467 at svn.freebsd.org>:
>
> em> Author: emax
> em> Date: Thu Jul 19 15:36:36 2012
> em> New Revision: 238622
> em> URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/238622
> em>
> em> Log:
> em>   Allow to specify no source-address-selection policy
> em>
> em>   MFC after:        1 week
> em>
> em> Modified:
> em>   head/etc/rc.d/ip6addrctl
> em>
> em> Modified: head/etc/rc.d/ip6addrctl
> em> ==============================================================================
> em> --- head/etc/rc.d/ip6addrctl        Thu Jul 19 14:43:46 2012        (r238621)
> em> +++ head/etc/rc.d/ip6addrctl        Thu Jul 19 15:36:36 2012        (r238622)
> em> @@ -83,6 +83,9 @@ ip6addrctl_start()
> em>             # Backward compatibility when ipv6_prefer=NO
> em>             ip6addrctl_prefer_ipv4
> em>     ;;
> em> +   [Nn][Oo][Nn][Ee])
> em> +           ip6addrctl flush >/dev/null 2>&1
> em> +   ;;
> em>     *)
> em>             warn "\$ip6addrctl_policy is invalid: ${ip6addrctl_policy}. " \
> em>                 " \"ipv4_prefer\" is used instead."
>
>  Just curious, why ip6addrctl_enable=NO is not enough here?  I would
>  like to eliminate yes/no/none keywords in $ip6addrctl_policy because
>  such keywords are vague.  If we need the empty rule for some reason,
>  "empty" would be a better name for the policy, I think.

i just wanted to make sure that there is a way to absolutely make sure
that there is no default address selection policy installed. the wide
know rule 9 of rfc 3484 is really messing things up for dns-style load
balancing. even when ipv6 is not used. personally, i don't think that
"none" is unreasonable word for "ip6addrctl_policy", but i don't feel
particularly strongly about it. any name will do as long as original
functionality is preserved.

thanks,
max