multiple ethernet interfaces, naming

[G. David Butler gdb@dbSystems.com]

>From: presotto@plan9.bell-labs.com
>Date: Thu, 3 Jul 1997 16:32:20 -0400
>Subject: re: multiple ethernet interfaces, naming
>
>I'ld continue ingnoring fddi myself and hoping that it
>goes away.  The 100baset ether is already easier to work
>with.  The giga ether will make it just plain anchronistic.

I agree.  I just wanted to get the syntax down.

>Up to you if you want to treat it as an ether or something
>else.

I went with #l0, #l1, etc. with assumption that other types
of interfaces (non ethernet) will need different support
for IP (like arp).

Done.  I have multiple interfaces working!  Now to phase II.

>From: beto@ncube.com
>Date: Thu, 3 Jul 97 16:05:13 PDT
>Subject: Re: multiple ethernet interfaces, naming
>
>I got another question about multiple ethernet interfaces.
>
>If I do announce("/tcp/*/0",....) what would be the content of
>/tcp/*/local if I have multiple ethernet/ip interfaces.

At this point, since there is no connection, unknown.

>Normally It would return something like
>
>	My.ip.add.ress!nextport
>
>but if we have multiple interfaces what should it return?

I think after the listen returns, then the local address should be
the address of the interface the packet came from.

>Some programs (bootp, arpd, ftpfs) use this trick to discover the
>local ip address and to generate unique port numbers.

Yeah, there will be changes here.

>Maybe 0.0.0.0!nextport until there is a connection and it
>knows which ip interface?

That may work.

>Any comments would be appreacited?

Lets ask presotto@plan9.bell-labs.com if he can give us the
syntax/semantics of the current implementation so we can
stay consistent.

Dave, can you help?

David Butler
gdb@dbSystems.com