[haiku-development] Re: RFC: Clean up the route command output?
- From: Alexander von Gluck <kallisti5@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: haiku-development@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2013 19:29:10 -0500
On Sun, 2013-06-23 at 22:09 +0200, Axel Dörfler wrote:
> > Was:
> > http://dev.haiku-os.org/attachment/ticket/9821/ipv6route.png
> >
> > Now:
> > http://imagebin.org/261585
>
> Can we please return to the netmask for IPv4
I originally changed it to get some consistancy in the route command
output. Others mentioned in IRC that as advanced users generally
use the route command, showing CIDR wasn't a big deal vs netmask.
Thoughts?
Changing it back to have IPv4 show netmasks and IPv6 show CIDR shouldn't
be too hard... although it means the output for each protocol won't be
consistant.
> and to the term "Gateway"
> rather than "Next hop"?
> It's called gateway everywhere, and I don't really see any reason to
> deviate from this terminology here.
I originally made this change as linux shows "Next Hop" however I don't
see that naming anywhere else.. so it really doesn't matter much to
me :).
Will fix.
Other related posts:
