Re: Thoughts on interface modes / multiple guest addresses

On Thu, Dec 18, 2025 at 12:03:44AM +0100, Stefano Brivio wrote:

On Wed, 17 Dec 2025 16:00:38 +1100 David Gibson wrote:

...

On Wed, Dec 17, 2025 at 01:01:36PM +1100, David Gibson wrote:

...

On Wed, Dec 17, 2025 at 01:29:36AM +0100, Stefano Brivio wrote:

...

On Tue, 16 Dec 2025 16:53:49 +1100 David Gibson wrote: [snip]

...

I've now updated to cover some more things, and considering the possibility of multiple guest addresses.. Turns out etherpad doesn't really do tables, so it's two sections for the two suggested modes, with matching subheadings.

It does, but I disabled the plug-in as you reported an issue which turned out to be https://github.com/bitwarden/clients/issues/17598 instead, and I was trying to sort out other possible reasons.

I just re-enabled it, tables are available from the toolbar, there's an icon just left of "Font Family". Note that it's still beta:

https://www.npmjs.com/package/ep_data_tables

and it has a couple of glitches. I just found one (which I didn't debug or report yet): don't start a page with a table, always write something before, otherwise it gets duplicated every time you load the document.

Other than that it looks reasonably robust to me, maybe quickly try with a test pad first but I think it should be usable.

Great, thanks.

It definitely has some jank - sometimes cursor / delete / backspace don't go where you expect. It's usable, though.

Unfortunately as soon as Jon loaded it (or was it me?) the table started getting duplicated empty rows and became unusable, just the same behaviour as I hit when I had no text before it.

Well, poop. I guess it's not usable, after all.

I converted it to a monospaced ASCII table, not elegant but that will have to do for the moment.

Ok.

...

I've updated this page to use a table. I've also added what the current behaviour is (both "local mode" and normal) for comparison, along with some other revisions.

Now, while I don't think any of this is relevant for the netlink monitor (but I didn't have a chance to comment about that yet), I had a very quick look anyway and I spotted a few inaccuracies.

I think it is relevant, because it's two different approaches to handling what we do when we get updates from it.

For example, we definitely don't set DHCP option 2,

Oops, I meant option 3. Corrected now.

and in some cases we do send DHCP option 121.

Ah, yes. Corrected.

On top of that, I don't think you can deprecate options without offering equivalent functionality. But anyway, not an actual review.

We absolutely could (and occasionally have), but it does require careful thought about the tradeoffs. Again, it's a draft. -- David Gibson (he or they) | I'll have my music baroque, and my code david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you, not the other way | around. http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson