From owner-freebsd-hackers  Sun Apr 23 21:13:35 1995
Return-Path: hackers-owner
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id VAA20900
          for hackers-outgoing; Sun, 23 Apr 1995 21:13:35 -0700
Received: from UUCP-GW.CC.UH.EDU (root@UUCP-GW.CC.UH.EDU [129.7.1.11])
          by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with SMTP id VAA20894
          for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Sun, 23 Apr 1995 21:13:31 -0700
Received: from Taronga.COM by UUCP-GW.CC.UH.EDU with UUCP id AA17165
  (5.67a/IDA-1.5); Sun, 23 Apr 1995 22:55:54 -0500
Received: by bonkers.taronga.com (smail2.5p) id AA20419; 23 Apr 95 22:54:57 CDT (Sun)
Received: (from peter@localhost) by bonkers.taronga.com (8.6.11/8.6.6) id WAA20416; Sun, 23 Apr 1995 22:54:57 -0500
From: Peter da Silva <peter@bonkers.taronga.com>
Message-Id: <199504240354.WAA20416@bonkers.taronga.com>
Subject: Re: Re(2): IP problem with 950412-SNAP (and earlier -SNAPs)
To: tom@haven.uniserve.com (Tom Samplonius)
Date: Sun, 23 Apr 1995 22:54:57 -0500 (CDT)
Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.org
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.91.950423204437.4581A-100000@haven.uniserve.com> from "Tom Samplonius" at Apr 23, 95 08:50:45 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23]
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 604       
Sender: hackers-owner@FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> > > or else the kernel restriction on routing to the local
> > > interface address needs to be relaxed (but what if you have multiple
> > > point-to-point links sharing the same address).

> > How could you do that? Each interface needs to have a unique address.

>   No it doesn't.  I've run a SLIP interface and an ethernet interface on 
> a FreeBSD machine both having the same address.  I know that it is 
> opinion of some that this shouldn't work, but .....

Well, I think it kinda violates TCP/IP requirements, yes. I guess it's
workable, but then you lose the ability to route to each address.