On Wed, 06.11.13 02:57, Tom Gundersen (t...@jklm.no) wrote: > >> Gateway=192.168.1.1 > >> Address=label@192.168.1.23/24 > >> Address=fe80::9aee:94ff:fe3f:c618/64 > > > > Hmm, what's the plan regarding confguration of scopes and other > > attributes of addresses? Is the "label@" syntax your invention or has > > this been used elsewhere (I am not opposed to the syntax, just curious). > > Good question. The @ syntax is my invention, but i'm very happy to > change it if anyone has a better suggestion. For the other properties > we might want, I would really like to find a syntax to get them all on > one line. I'll try figure out a more or less exhaustive list of the > properties we might want to support and suggest a syntax for it. In > the meantime I'll commit this without the "label@" support, as the > rest should be uncontroversial, and then we can add back the labeling > when we are sure it is the way we want it.
I have my suspicions that that won't work out since there already are quite a few properties for addresses, no? There's scope, flags, label. For Point-To-Point stuff the address needs to be paired with a local one, and in other cases with a broadcast address. We should at least try to normalize this into different sections, no? Something that might work is to allow seperate [Address] sections for the complicated cases on top of Address= for the usual cases? Lennart -- Lennart Poettering, Red Hat _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel