From owner-freebsd-bugs  Wed Feb  5 08:40:08 1997
Return-Path: <owner-bugs>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id IAA18887
          for bugs-outgoing; Wed, 5 Feb 1997 08:40:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from gnats@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id IAA18820;
          Wed, 5 Feb 1997 08:40:03 -0800 (PST)
Date: Wed, 5 Feb 1997 08:40:03 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <199702051640.IAA18820@freefall.freebsd.org>
To: freebsd-bugs
Cc: 
From: Bill Fenner <fenner@parc.xerox.com>
Subject: Re: bin/2657: ypserv thinks there is no computers in network 10.1.2.3 netmask 255.255.255.0 
Reply-To: Bill Fenner <fenner@parc.xerox.com>
Sender: owner-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

The following reply was made to PR bin/2657; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Bill Fenner <fenner@parc.xerox.com>
To: Dmitrij Tejblum <tejblum@arc.hq.cti.ru>
Cc: Bill Fenner <fenner@parc.xerox.com>, freebsd-gnats-submit@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: bin/2657: ypserv thinks there is no computers in network 10.1.2.3 netmask 255.255.255.0 
Date: Wed, 5 Feb 1997 08:35:05 PST

 >after all, why my securenets file must differ from my ifconfig commands?
 
 IMHO, if we make this change to yp, then we need to make similar changes
 to anything that accepts a network number.  Otherwise, confusion will
 abound ("How come 'route' doesn't work when I use a host address, but
 it works for YP?").  I'd prefer to add a warning to ypserv until we
 make a project-wide decision to allow this kind of configuration.
 
   Bill