Klaus Klein wrote
> Berndt Josef Wulf <wulf@dingo.ping.net.au> writes:
> 
> [ This is looking very similar to misc/12814... ]
> 
> > ----------------- /etc/defaults/rc.conf ----------------------
> > # Set this to the hostname or the IP address of the router that will
> > # route IPv6 packets.
> > # If blank, use /etc/mygate6
> > #
> > defaultroute6=""
> > ----------------- /etc/defaults/rc.conf ----------------------
> 
> One thing that strikes me is that it doesn't scale terribly well,
> i.e. what's going to be done for the next additional address family to
> be supported?
> 
> Furthermore, ifconfig.if(5) provides an example of routing information
> being modified using shell evaluation, so why add an alternative
> interface to that interface?  (Note I'm not arguing about possibly
> deprecating the existing defaultroute/mygate at this point...)

PR12814 is indeed similar to the offered proposal at hand and to me it
signifies that we owe to do something here, however, I was unaware
about this PR prior to my submission.

Can you expand on the argument of scalability and the additional
address family a little more? I'm afraid you lost me here.

The proposed changes have no impact on the current situation other
than providing a means of configuring IPv6 capable systems using a
procedure similar to that currently used for IPv4.

cheerio Berndt
-- 
Name    : Berndt Josef Wulf            | +++ With BSD on Packet Radio +++
E-Mail  : wulf@ping.net.au             |    tfkiss, tnt, dpbox, wampes
ICQ     : 18196098                     |  VK5ABN, Nairne, South Australia 
URL     : http://www.ping.net.au/~wulf | MBOX : vk5abn@vk5abn.#lmr.#sa.au.oc
Sysinfo : DEC AXPpci33+, NetBSD-1.5    | BBS  : vk5abn.#lmr.#sa.aus.oc