On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 02:48:18AM -0500, Matthew Martin wrote:
> A rule on a bridge interface that uses arp or rarp may be followed with
> a literal "request" or "reply" (cf. sbin/ifconfig/brconfig.c L1041 and
> 1048), so the Ar macro is incorrect as it's argument is not
> a placeholder.
>
right/
> Aside: Is there a rule for when to list alternatives with foo | bar or
> foo Ns | Ns bar? in/out, arp/rarp, and request/reply are all the former
> sans-Ns; however, block/pass uses the Ns macro.
>
normally we just use arg1 | arg2, but sometimes this becomes ambiguous:
rule block | pass [in | out]
do "in" and "out" go with both "block" and "pass", or just "pass"? so
sometimes we scrunch them up to make it clearer:
rule block|pass [in | out]
hence the need for Ns.
i just committed your diff, but it needed a little more:
Index: ifconfig.8
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/sbin/ifconfig/ifconfig.8,v
retrieving revision 1.350
diff -u -r1.350 ifconfig.8
--- ifconfig.8 24 Jun 2020 17:40:10 -0000 1.350
+++ ifconfig.8 27 Jun 2020 15:31:01 -0000
@@ -751,7 +751,7 @@
.Bk -words
.Op Cm tag Ar tagname
.Oo
-.Cm arp | rarp Op Ar request | reply
+.Cm arp | rarp Op Cm request | reply
.Op Cm sha Ar lladdr
.Op Cm spa Ar ipaddr
.Op Cm tha Ar lladdr
@@ -779,9 +779,9 @@
keyword for regular packets and
.Cm rarp
for reverse arp.
-.Ar request
+.Cm request
and
-.Ar reply
+.Cm reply
limit matches to requests or replies.
The source and target host addresses can be matched with the
.Cm sha
thanks for the diff!
jmc
