Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 21:17:38 +0000 (GMT) From: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> To: phk@critter.freebsd.dk (Poul-Henning Kamp) Cc: brian@Awfulhak.org (Brian Somers), winter@jurai.net (Matthew N. Dodd), tlambert@primenet.com (Terry Lambert), arch@FreeBSD.ORG, brian@hak.lan.awfulhak.org Subject: Re: Software detection of link integrity Message-ID: <200006212117.OAA11432@usr02.primenet.com> In-Reply-To: <55786.961533545@critter.freebsd.dk> from "Poul-Henning Kamp" at Jun 20, 2000 10:39:05 PM
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> >> I did this entirely for sppp, but it applies fully to any other > >> interface: an ethernet should remain configured but remove the > >> routes if the cable is unplugged. > > > >No, I think the aim here is to keep the routes but to adjust them so > >that they're via an interface rather than an IP number, something > >like: > > We should not keep an route to a net which is down, that is just wrong, > and defeats the pupose of routing daemons like gated/zebra etc. What about a dial on demand device that is transiently connected to the Internet, either through an integrated Analog or ISDN modem? If the route is down, then the link traffic can not be monitored, and if link traffic can not be monitored, then the idea of "demand" can not be implemented. One must be able to have a default route to a "tun0" device for a downed PPP dameon. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200006212117.OAA11432>