Date: Tue, 10 Dec 1996 14:38:17 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> To: nate@mt.sri.com (Nate Williams) Cc: terry@lambert.org, grog@lemis.de, freebsd-mobile@freebsd.org, FreeBSD-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: It works! Solved my problem wih Etherlink III on AcerNote Light Message-ID: <199612102138.OAA04945@phaeton.artisoft.com> In-Reply-To: <199612102018.NAA08722@rocky.mt.sri.com> from "Nate Williams" at Dec 10, 96 01:18:49 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > > ifconfig lp0 192.109.197.159 192.109.197.137 > > > ifconfig zp0 192.109.197.159 > > > > This is incorrect. > > Youare correct, but it is allowed on Point-Point interfaces and doesn't > cause problems because of host routes. Hmmm... How do I tell the difference between a PPP connection that is a connection to a subnet and a PPP connection that is my connection to the Internet, such that I (as the PPP) will set up the correct host and default routes? This actually bears on the modem/ethernet combo card case, or the case of an undocked laptop with an ethernet in the docking adapter, but an IR connector otherwise: I should have a marked preference for the faster media when equivalent media are available. Windows95 RAS (Remote Access Services) has a checkbox on their properties sheet for this: First: open My computer open Dial-Up Networking right-button(properties) on a connection icon Then: click the "Server Type..." button to open the "Server Types" window click the "TCP/IP Settings..." button to open the "TCP/IP Settings" window Then: "Use default gateway on remote network" is checked: - Deletes the previous default route to the local network adapter card - Adds a default route for all network addresses *except* those for which a subnet route already exists to the Windows95 routing table (use the undocumented "ROUTE PRINT" command in a Windows95 DOS box) "Use default gateway on remote network" is not checked: - Adds a route for the subnet for the network (logical subnetting is not allowed) for the dialed target IP address In other words, if I have a local network connection, and I dial up my pop account at my ISP, then Windows95 tends to screw up the routing while the connection is up. At least it has the checkbox, though... and you *can* hack the routing table manually, if you absolutely need to (though multiple NIC point-to-point routing is not supported without a lot of hacking, running a ported routed, and doing the registry hack that differentiates WindowsNT Worstation from WindowsNT Server (only Win95 doesn't have the thread that runs once a clock tick to hack this value back like Workstation does). In any case, it seems to me that you would have to name them differently in BSD, since in BSD, the interfaces are actually route destinations. Maybe he is running routed? I'll bet that would cause the behaviour, if it's otherwise legal, like you say, to name them the same IP address. Regards, Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199612102138.OAA04945>