Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Programming Operating Systems BSD IT Technology

ifconfig refactoring for FreeBSD 125

Posted by Hemos from the make-it-work-better dept.
Dan writes "Based on Sam Leffer's suggestion, Bruce Simpson has been working on refactoring ifconfig(8). ifconfig is a FreeBSD unix utility used to assign an address to a network interface and/or configure network interface parameters. Bruce says that ifconfig has grown increasingly large and become unwieldy. Part of the effort has been to get a handle on all of the options that are currently supported so he has written a YACC grammar for it. He has uploaded some grammer, created a design document and also generated a PDF file you can view which shows you syntax diagrams for each part of the parse tree."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

ifconfig refactoring for FreeBSD More

ifconfig refactoring for FreeBSD

Comments Filter:
  • While they are at it, they should add something to parse /etc/rc.conf and reconfigure all interfaces while the system is running. This is one area where Linux has an advantage.

  • Wondering what YACC is? (Score:5, Informative)

    by a.koepke ( 688359 ) on Monday December 01, 2003 @11:51AM (#7599012)
    For those of you who do not know what YACC is all about [compilertools.net]

    Its good to see something like this happening as ifconfig is not only used on FreeBSD but also on most (all?) Linux distros.

    Ifconfig is just one of the many contributions the BSD projects have given to the Linux and UNIX community.

    PS: To all those "bsd is dying" trolls, things like this show its not. Without the work of the BSD projects you wouldn't have some of the many tools you use each day.

    • Its good to see something like this happening as ifconfig is not only used on FreeBSD but also on most (all?) Linux distros.

      They all have an ifconfig (even windows has, but it's spelled ipconfig), but a different one. The GNU version takes different arguments anyway - like for example none at all, which the FreeBSD version doesn't allow - so this will most likely not affect any Linux user in any way.

      To all those "bsd is dying" trolls, things like this show its not. Without the work of the BSD projects yo

      • Re:Wondering what YACC is? (Score:1, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward
        The GNU version takes different arguments anyway - like for example none at all, which the FreeBSD version doesn't allow - so this will most likely not affect any Linux user in any way.

        You are an idiot.

        user@hemlock$ ifconfig
        rl0: flags=8843 mtu 1500
        inet 192.168.1.5 netmask 0xffffff00 broadcast 192.168.1.255
        inet6 fe80::248:54ff:fe85:5624%rl0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x1
        ether 00:48:54:85:56:24
        media: Ethernet autoselect (100baseTX )
        status: active
        lp0: flags=8810 mtu 15

        • Re:Wondering what YACC is? (Score:4, Funny)

          by Pathwalker ( 103 ) * <hotgrits@yourpants.net> on Monday December 01, 2003 @06:36PM (#7603491) Homepage Journal
          You might want to consider swapping out rl0 for a better card - read /usr/src/sys/pci/if_rl.c for details.

          The RealTek 8139 PCI NIC redefines the meaning of 'low end.' This is

          probably the worst PCI ethernet controller ever made, with the possible
          exception of the FEAST chip made by SMC. The 8139 supports bus-master
          DMA, but it has a terrible interface that nullifies any performance
          gains that bus-master DMA usually offers.
          • el cheapo cards have their uses.

            eg external interface on a NAT box where the cable modem's network port is 10 megabit half duplex.
            • Even better, I use two realtek for internal interfaces and one 3com for the cable connection.
              The 3coms don't like it when there's more than one in my firewall, the realteks work just fine. Only setting the macaddress didn't go well, so that's why the 3com on the outside.
              • As long as no one pretends that they can keep up with the better cards, they'll be fine. There's just no reason to use anything better than a realtek on a computer where the system load doesn't matter (eg: dedicated NAT box) with a network that's slow to begin with.
          • I'm sure the Netgear FA 311 is even worse -- when it's in my server (epox 8k7a), it will not power off or reboot -- I have to pull the plug on it.
            • I have a netgear FA311 in my epox (8kha+), no problems like yours but I used to have a problem that often the network interface wouldnt work on boot (had to disable then enable the conn in win2k) and before that the drivers used to blue screen 2k (which is actually quite rare!) under heavy load of connections, though a patch fixed that.
          • The RealTek 8139 PCI NIC redefines the meaning of 'low end.'

            I've heard that the C and D variant fixed a lot of issues and I've had great success with them.

            However, I'd like to nominate a contender. Davicom. I've had some extreme difficulties getting some Davicom NICs working at all without dropping connection or extreme speed problems. Under Win2k SP4, Debian Linux and OpenBSD. Admittedly these were all on-board in two classrooms I was challenged with. So the problems may have been with the implementatio
          • awwwwww crap!!!! I use this chipset almost exclusively cause it has a cool little crab on the chip :P

      • The GNU version takes different arguments anyway - like for example none at all, which the FreeBSD version doesn't allow

        Not true. From the ifconfig manpage in FreeBSD (actually DragonFly, but who cares. Dfly didn't change ifconfig):

        The ifconfig utility displays the current configuration for a network interface when no optional parameters are supplied.

      • Using ifconfig w/out arguments (Score:5, Informative)

        by RT Alec ( 608475 ) * <alecNO@SPAMslashdot.chuckle.com> on Monday December 01, 2003 @12:29PM (#7599459) Homepage Journal

        Starting with FreeBSD 4.x, ifconfig with no arguments simply lists all interfaces the kernel has found, and their configuration details.

        %>ifconfig
        de0: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> mtu 1500
        inet 10.0.254.254 netmask 0xffff0000 broadcast 10.0.255.255
        ether 00:e0:29:37:09:a8
        media: Ethernet autoselect (100baseTX <full-duplex>)
        status: active
        de1: flags=8c43<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,OACTIVE,SIMPLEX,MU LTICAST> mtu 1500
        inet 10.1.254.254 netmask 0xffff0000 broadcast 10.1.255.255
        ether 00:e0:29:37:09:a9
        media: Ethernet autoselect
        de2: flags=8c43<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,OACTIVE,SIMPLEX,MU LTICAST> mtu 1500
        inet 10.2.254.254 netmask 0xffff0000 broadcast 10.2.255.255
        ether 00:e0:29:37:0c:d6
        media: Ethernet autoselect
        de3: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> mtu 1500
        inet 10.3.254.254 netmask 0xffff0000 broadcast 10.3.255.255
        ether 00:e0:29:37:0c:d7
        media: Ethernet autoselect (10baseT/UTP)
        status: active
        lo0: flags=8049<UP,LOOPBACK,RUNNING,MULTICAST> mtu 16384
        inet 127.0.0.1 netmask 0xff000000
        wan0: flags=51<UP,POINTOPOINT,RUNNING> mtu 1500
        inet 219.51.254.45 --> 219.51.254.46 netmask 0xfffffffc
        %>
        (the actual output has tabs to make the formatting a little prettier)

      • GNU ifconfig - What? (Score:5, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 01, 2003 @02:19PM (#7600685)
        There is no "GNU ifconfig". Linux has it's own version which is probably based on an old BSD version, or, maybe written from scratch.

        % ifconfig -V
        net-tools 1.60
        ifconfig 1.42 (2001-04-13)

        You can tell it's not GNU because it doesn't spout on about the GPL everytime you run it.

      • Re:Wondering what YACC is? (Score:4, Insightful)

        by ctr2sprt ( 574731 ) on Monday December 01, 2003 @04:05PM (#7601852)
        In other words, this is really one of the most boring stories ever, even considering the "let's duplicate the daemonnews slashbox" policy /. recently adopted.
        I think the issue here is that most Slashdot editors don't know or care about the BSDs, but they need to post some articles. Since they have no way of distinguishing between interesting news and uninteresting, they rely on other sites to assign importance. The effects of this are obvious: not a lot of replies, over half of them trolls, and people getting their BSD news elsewhere.

        You heard it here first: The Slashdot BSD Section is Dying.

        • Re:Wondering what YACC is? (Score:4, Interesting)

          by utlemming ( 654269 ) on Monday December 01, 2003 @10:19PM (#7605419) Homepage
          No, the problem is that when you actually submit an interesting BSD article for /., they ignore it. For example, how many of us BSD users knew that the BSD developers actually commented on the SCO suit?
          "Your story just might not be interesting!

          This last one requires a little explanation: if you submit a story, and we don't select it because we think it's not particularly interesting, we're not making a judgment about you as a human being. Deciding the interest level of a story is a very subjective thing, and we have to take into account not only the intrinsic interest of the story itself, but what else is happening that day. On a day when lots of things are happening, we reject some very good stories. But on a day when nothing interesting is happening, we may post something not really as cool.

          This was taken from the /. FAQ [slashdot.org]

          The conclusion that I have come to is that the /. editors just don't care about BSD. And the editors probably use the above quote to get out of anything us BSD users might find interesting. Mathmatically, it would be represented, "Linux == Interesting; BSD != Linux; BSD != Interesting" and since "BSD != Linux then BSD MUST be dying."

          And I think that your absolutely right, about them not knowing what is worthy of reporting and what is not. When I first read the Refacturing of IFCONFIG, the thought that went through my mind was, "Who cares?" It really has no bearing on the useability of the OS. I think the real issue is that /. needs to put some one who actually uses BSD as an OS doing the editing. I think then, we might see some interesting.

          Personally I think that the comment about BSD users getting BSD news elsewhere is pretty insightful. The only reason I read /. is because there are other technology issues which I am interested in and the Linux movement does facinate me. But nontheless, with the general bigotted spirit towards the BSD's, I can see why I, and most likely others go elsewhere.

          A while back I fired off an email to address the concerns of us BSD users. The reply I got back from CdrTaco was essentially if more BSD users read /., then the trolls would be silenced with more BSD users moderating, and more /. stories would be about BSD, because there would be more submissions.

          Well, I'll get off my soap box now, and wait till I get moderated down. Any bets on what it will be? Flamebait? Or maybe Off Topic. But moderators, if I can not be insightful or interesting, please vote for Flamebait.

          • Re:Wondering what YACC is? (Score:5, Interesting)

            by edhall ( 10025 ) <slashdot@weirdnoise.com> on Tuesday December 02, 2003 @08:19AM (#7607839) Homepage

            The ifconfig thread is interesting from a number of perspectives. Given that ifconfig is perhaps the command-line utility embodying BSD's decades-old networking legacy, it takes some courage to propose a radical reworking of it. Using a formal grammar rather than the ad hoc accretion of command-line options that 95% of Unix/Linux utilities use is another bold step. And opening the way to added functionality (one of the motivations for this project) adds to the interest. Sure, just looking at the surface it's easy to say "so they're changing some arguments to some crufty old Unix command -- ho hum." But it may well represent the initial step in a complete rethinking of how networking is administered at the host level. Even if it doesn't pan out that way, it's worth taking notice.

            BTW, I don't moderate BSD stories any more. When I mod down the trolls, I tend to get slammed in metamod. (Talk about a hostile environment!) Hope springs eternal, though -- I keep thinking that /. will eventually start doing some housekeeping.

            -Ed
      • They all have an ifconfig (even windows has, but it's spelled ipconfig), but a different one. The GNU version takes different arguments anyway - like for example none at all, which the FreeBSD version doesn't allow

        umm, no. ifconfig on freebsd with no arguments will run the equivalent of 'ifconfig -a'.
      • The GNU version takes different arguments anyway - like for example none at all, which the FreeBSD version doesn't allow

        When was the last time you used FreeBSD?

        $ uname
        FreeBSD
        $ ifconfig
        rl0: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST > mtu 1500
        inet 192.168.1.10 netmask 0xffffff00 broadcast 192.168.1.255
        [snip]

        FreeBSD has the best ifconfig of all Unices I've used. My favorite part is being albe to use the slash notation for the netmask, e.g. to add a secondary IP to fxp0, yo
  • Refactoring is meant to be about improving the design of existing code, in small controlled ways. This doesn't look like refactoring, just a rewrite of a section of it.

    Either way I find it hard to appreciate why this is news.
  • Just checking. ;>

  • What ever happened to "Small is Beautiful"? (Score:5, Funny)

    by JohnQPublic ( 158027 ) on Monday December 01, 2003 @09:00PM (#7604912)
    A yacc grammar? That makes it official, ifconfig is now a contender for the ls Memorial Too Damn Many Options award. Other known entrants include ld, most X applications, and the ever-popular gcc.

  • Nice to see work on improving ifconfig (Score:4, Interesting)

    by nutznboltz ( 473437 ) on Tuesday December 02, 2003 @12:26AM (#7606341) Homepage Journal
    Now if only the ARP interface could be improved too. Seems once the API for ARP was an ioctl() that was easy to use. Now try and write some code for *BSD to adjust the ARP table without going
    • system("/usr/sbin/arp ...")
    and you will see pretty quickly that it's much more complicated than any ioctl()

    Conceptually, ARP table entries as routing table entries is great but the API is in need of some serious re-working or a library to hide the complexity.

  • Linux's iproute2+tc (Score:4, Informative)

    by szap ( 201293 ) on Wednesday December 03, 2003 @04:37AM (#7616588)
    FWIW, Linux 2.4+ has a significantly different way to access and config the kernel's network interfaces using iproute2+tc (using the commands 'ip' and 'tc') that is cleaner than the ifconfig syntax, and supports more advanced routing features (all sorts of firewalling rules and, packets queues, for instance).

    ifconfig is just the older, more compatible way to config the interfaces for those who grew up using older Linuxes and other Unices. You can do everything ifconfig + iptables using ip + tc and more.

    So before anyone claims that Linux's ifconfig sucks and is too complicated, they've already made a better replacement for it, just needs more documentation and exposure.

    • Re:Linux's iproute2+tc (Score:3, Interesting)

      by chrysalis ( 50680 ) *
      Please mod this up.

      "ip" is definitely great and I really miss that command on BSD systems.

      Not only it is way more powerful that ifconfig, it is also easier to use, with a very logical and comprehensive syntax ("ip route add default via 192.168.1.221")

      Refactoring "ifconfig" nowadays sounds like a total waste of time IMHO. Hopefully Dragonfly will take a more modern approach.

    • Re:Linux's iproute2+tc (Score:1, Interesting)

      by df5ea ( 227427 ) *

      You can do everything ifconfig + iptables using ip + tc and more.

      Try to do ifconfig eth0 allmulti with ip.

    • Re:Linux's iproute2+tc (Score:3, Insightful)

      by jjgm ( 663044 )
      "ip" is a well-structured command, although the interactions between iproute2 and ifconfig-based interface aliases confuse people (my usual advice is: one or the other).

      "tc" is a complex elephant in considerable need of exposure to someone who both a) cares about qdisc and b) understands OS usability. ip & tc are hardly comparable. The "shapecfg" command is more intuitive, but communicates with a completely separate and underdeveloped kernel subsystem.

      iptables then has another syntax to learn, just

Slashdot Top Deals

"It's a dog-eat-dog world out there, and I'm wearing Milkbone underware." -- Norm, from _Cheers_

Close