Date: Tue, 20 Aug 1996 16:38:11 BST From: Michael Ryan <mike@NetworX.ie> To: Bill Fenner <fenner@parc.xerox.com> Cc: FreeBSD Support <questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Does FBSD 2.1 honour ICMP redirects? Message-ID: <ECS9608201611B@NetworX.ie>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 20 Aug 1996 07:21:40 PDT Bill Fenner wrote: > If you decided to start sending to 194.125.135.1 instead, would you > still be sending down the PPP link or would you use another link? If > the PPP link, then you can't actually do anything (since the IP address > of the router is only used to get the link layer address and there's > only one machine on the other end of the PPP link). If not, then > RFC1122 says to ignore the redirect. > > The router on the other end of your PPP link is asking you to do > something impossible; it's asking you to not use it as a router to > get to things that are beyond it. Hi Bill, Thanks for sticking with me on this one. Your precise explanation has finally knocked on my head and made me see the light. Of course you're right -- the router IP address is only used to get its link address. Background: My ISP had given me a gateway IP address, which I ignored for months. I simply set my peer as the default router. But, last night, while tcpdump'ing the PPP traffic, I noticed the Redirects and got to thinking "yeah, I -should- be using the gateway, after all". This has raised two interesting things for me (the 2nd of which might interest the group as a whole): (a) Why do PC-based packages not grey-out the Gateway field when configuring SLIP/PPP as the data link? (b) I tried to install the gateway address given me by my ISP as the default route and got a "Disc quota exceeded" message back from "route". Does this message indicate a bug/feature in FreeBSD's handling of the situation? Mike <mike@NetworX.ie> ---
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?ECS9608201611B>