On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 09:12:15PM +0200, Sven Eckelmann wrote:
batctl currently supports settings which are either mesh interface or vlan specific. But B.A.T.M.A.N. V introduced two additional settings which are hard (slave) interface specific.
To support these, an additional command prefix called hardif is implemented for some sysfs commands:
$ batctl -m bat0 hardif eth0 ...
Signed-off-by: Sven Eckelmann sven@narfation.org
Three thoughts/questions:
Currently we do not allow adding a hard-interface to two meshes, right? So the "-m bat0" here is redundant?
Have we used the terminology "hard interface" in UI and documentation before? Maybe it's just me, but I'm wondering whether the terms "soft interface" and "hard interface" might be a bit confusing to users, as these days people not only add hardware interfaces but also virtual ones. And these terms are not used in other projects (afaik). Maybe just stick to the more commonly used term "slave interface" and keep "hard" and "soft" interface as internal?
I'm wondering how it would look like if we were having settings both applicable to a soft and hard interface. What about using a "-s <slave-iface>", similar to the "-m <mesh-iface>" instead of the "hardif" command prefix? So that you could do things like:
$ batctl [-m <mesh-iface>|-s <slave-iface>] multicast_fanout <int>
in the future, for instance.
Regards, Linus