Re: STEP 2, fixing dhclient behaviour with multiple interfaces

On Tue, 29 Jul 2003, Terry Lambert wrote:

> > Some of those events already exist for routing sockets, so in a worst case
> > scenario, you can hook up a routing socket to a kqueue :-).
> > 
> > Martin -- you might want to try the "route monitor" command sometime and
> > take a look at the vent stream there for things to consider.
> 
> Does that work if you don't have an IP address assigned to the interface
> at all yet?  I was under the impression that it only sent out route
> change events (maybe I need to update my copy of the -current sources,
> though).  What I was talking about is the idea that naked interface
> (0.0.0.0) arrivals and departures could be signalled, which would cause
> dhclient to try to get a lease on the interface. 

got message of size 24 on Tue Jul 29 13:27:59 2003
RTM_IFANNOUNCE: interface arrival/departure: len 24, if# 6, what: arrival

got message of size 96 on Tue Jul 29 13:28:45 2003
RTM_IFINFO: iface status change: len 96, if# 6, flags:

got message of size 24 on Tue Jul 29 13:28:45 2003
RTM_IFANNOUNCE: interface arrival/departure: len 24, if# 6, what: departure

The event that you currently have to get using kqueue() is the link state,
which isn't announced using routing sockets.  If only for consistency, I'd
like it if there were an ifnet level announcement in routing sockets for a
link state change on capable interfaces.

Robert N M Watson             FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Projects
robert_at_fledge.watson.org      Network Associates Laboratories