Date: Sun, 12 Jul 1998 11:04:52 +0200 (MEST) From: Martin Husemann <martin@rumolt.teuto.de> To: malte@webmore.com Cc: hm@hcs.de, freebsd-isdn@FreeBSD.ORG, hohmuth@innocent.com Subject: Re: fallback-IP-addr for dyn. dials. Is there any use for it ? Message-ID: <199807120904.LAA02855@rumolt.teuto.de> In-Reply-To: <XFMail.980711180811.malte@webmore.com> from "Malte Lance" at Jul 11, 98 06:08:11 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Uhh, sorry, > I found it just annoying to add this 0.0.0.0-"trigger-rule" into my > firewall-file and i did not for sure knew what implications such a rule > would have. And i found it much neater to just add "dynlip" to the > 'spppcontrol'-call instead of configuring the sppp-device with a magic > 0.0.0.0 number. Yes, 0.0.0.0 is magical for routing and that's ok, but > why config a device with 0.0.0.0 ??? Have to admit I'm still running this other software on that router (where I can assign any address and get dynamic ip address assignement on both sides of the link) :-( Yes, you are right. The 0.0.0.0 and 0.0.0.1 hack are realy ugly hacks and have to go. I talked to Gary about this right after they came in and he basically agreed, but wanted to keep our sppp as close as possible to the standard sppp in the FreeBSD tree. The flag in sppcontrol is the right way to go. We need "we-have-dynamic-ip" and "they-have-dynamic-ip" flags. So now: let's either break our incompatibility with the standard sppp even more or move the standard sppp to a clean solution (or do the former right now and the later as soon as possible). Martin To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-isdn" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199807120904.LAA02855>