Hello, world!\n
> I think that we should expand static protocol to allow adding or deleting
> routes interactively. There are some problematic behavioral details in
> it; e.g., how we should handle interactive removal of a route from
> configuration. Should we have two independent sets of routes, one
> added/removed by reconfiguration, one interactively? Or should we allow
> to remove interactively one from configuration? If so, should it respawn
> during reconfiguration?
Maybe define a separate protocol which exports routes added/removed online?
Have a nice fortnight
--
Martin `MJ' Mares <[email protected]> http://mj.ucw.cz/
Faculty of Math and Physics, Charles University, Prague, Czech Rep., Earth
Q: How many mathematicians does it take to screw in a lightbulb? A: 0.999999...
