| 1 |
On 2010-09-20, Michał Górny <gentoo@××××××××××.pl> wrote: |
| 2 |
> --Sig_/_5ZtNmvcA5/1kN/vUZv3UxF |
| 3 |
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 |
| 4 |
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> On Mon, 20 Sep 2010 11:16:08 -0500 |
| 7 |
> William Hubbs <williamh@g.o> wrote: |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
>> The drawback I see for newnet is that it does not allow the user to |
| 10 |
>> control each interface separately, so if you want to cycle one |
| 11 |
>> interface for some reason, this is not doable in that setup. I agree |
| 12 |
>> this is a serious drawback. Oldnet addresses this by having a |
| 13 |
>> separate script for each interface. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> That's not entirely true. If you use DHCP indeed, |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
We don't. So it is entirely true. newnet does not provide a way to |
| 18 |
cycle a single interface; you can work around that by going outside of |
| 19 |
newnet, which is fairly simple if you're using dhcp, less so if you're |
| 20 |
not, but that's not the same as newnet having the support. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
-- |
| 23 |
Schapiro's Explanation: |
| 24 |
The grass is always greener on the other side -- but that's |
| 25 |
because they use more manure. |
Archives