On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 05:53:42PM +0200, Mike Belopuhov wrote: > looks like you misunderstand the problem we're dealing with here. >
Sure, I do. You're trying to push one thing and you don't want to hear the concerns about a specific detail of it. > >> FWIW it would be interesting to modify tun(4) so that it doesn't > >> need to detach/reattach itself when switching between mode, this > >> would allow us to stop reusing the last index. > >> > > > > Or you could simply rewrite tun(4)? > > > > Isn't there any other way to do what you want without stopping to > > reuse the index? SNMP simply expects that if_indexes are fairly > > static, linear, and without holes. Why should we change that in > > OpenBSD? Is there any security reason to "randomize" the indexes - > > No. > > > > Reyk > > > > or snmp can simply stop assuming things. if_index wasn't created > for snmp in the first place. Of course, everyone else is wrong, let's change the world! IfIndex is used by SNMP since at least 1988 (RFC 1066) and many many tools have adopted it expecting this behaviour. Anyway, just go ahead and do the stuff. I don't care, it is not a big issue for snmpd. But I still don't see the point of changing the semantics instead of finding another way to do what you want. Unless there is a security issue or similar with if_indexes and changing it would actually improve something. Blah. Reyk
