Re: [bonding] Add basic support for dynamic configuration of bond interfaces

[jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sun, 2004-01-11 at 09:28, Amir Noam wrote:

> 
> > I would suggest a simple character device (misc_register), and let
> > the userland application configure settings unrelated to a single
> > object.
> 
> I was trying to follow the example of several other network modules 
> (e.g. vlan, dlci, bridge) that use a socket level ioctl hook to 
> handle such deviceless commands.
> 
> Do you think that a char device is preferrable, given that other 
> similar modules use a socket ioctl hook?

I think a netlink interface would be the better alternative.
The L2C netlink socket protocol would be appropriate for bonding
at least for 2.6.x. Bridging, VLAN should also move to this.

cheers,
jamal