Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1999 12:20:35 +0000 From: Niall Smart <niall@pobox.com> To: Sheldon Hearn <sheldonh@uunet.co.za> Cc: Cillian Sharkey <cillian@Baker.ie>, Doug White <dwhite@resnet.uoregon.edu>, questions@freebsd.org, hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Various Questions Message-ID: <37B2BC13.ECA642D0@pobox.com> References: <1789.934451267@axl.noc.iafrica.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Sheldon Hearn wrote: > > On Thu, 12 Aug 1999 11:29:47 GMT, Niall Smart wrote: > > > Or is the test for IFF_PROMISC made earlier in the code? You > > should only print a disabled message when it has previously > > been enabled so that log file watchers can always match up > > the up/down pairs. > > I've been using if.c modified exactly as suggested for a few months now > and have experienced the intended results without apparent problems. But what happens if you write a program which does whatever ioctl is required to unpromiscify an interface and run it on an unpromiscuous interface, does it print a message to syslog even though promiscuous mode was never enabled in the first place? Time to start reading some code methinks Niall + To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?37B2BC13.ECA642D0>