Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1999 16:20:49 -0400 (EDT) From: Garrett Wollman <wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> To: "Matthew N. Dodd" <winter@jurai.net> Cc: David Greenman <dg@root.com>, Paul Southworth <pauls@ieng.com>, freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Interfaces don't go down when network is physically down Message-ID: <199904202020.QAA29630@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.02.9904201439170.2158-100000@sasami.jurai.net> References: <199904201814.LAA10552@implode.root.com> <Pine.BSF.4.02.9904201439170.2158-100000@sasami.jurai.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
<<On Tue, 20 Apr 1999 14:42:08 -0400 (EDT), "Matthew N. Dodd" <winter@jurai.net> said: > Should we? > Is it acceptable for the driver to frob the IFF_UP flag when it gets an > event that should be reflected by a state change of IFF_UP? The trouble is that, once an interface goes down, there might not be any traffic traversing it which will cause it to come back up again. (Some NICs don't notice the state of the wire unless they are transmitting.) That's why Cisco implemented `keepalive'. -GAWollman -- Garrett A. Wollman | O Siem / We are all family / O Siem / We're all the same wollman@lcs.mit.edu | O Siem / The fires of freedom Opinions not those of| Dance in the burning flame MIT, LCS, CRS, or NSA| - Susan Aglukark and Chad Irschick To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199904202020.QAA29630>