Date: Sun, 4 Jan 1998 19:31:37 +0100 From: J Wunsch <j@uriah.heep.sax.de> To: Brian Somers <brian@awfulhak.org> Cc: Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com>, John-Mark Gurney <gurney_j@efn.org>, freebsd-bugs@hub.freebsd.org, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: kern/5404: slXX slip (tun & ppp) interfaces always point to point Message-ID: <19980104193137.01479@uriah.heep.sax.de> In-Reply-To: <199801041629.QAA04727@awfulhak.demon.co.uk>; from Brian Somers on Sun, Jan 04, 1998 at 04:29:33PM %2B0000 References: <19980104110521.14399@uriah.heep.sax.de> <199801041629.QAA04727@awfulhak.demon.co.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
As Brian Somers wrote: > Not quite. I was suggesting that instead of the first, we have the > second, or in fact > > route add 1.2.3.4 -netmask 0xffffff00 1.4.5.6 > > If you specify a 0xffffffff netmask, you get the same as the existing > stuff *always* does. However, since most people don't bother messing with the netmask on p2p interfaces at all (why should they), they'll always catch the default netmask, so the above will violate the principle of least surprise for them (configurations that used to work would no longer work). > The real purpose, as you've already suggested, is that you get the > associated broadcast address. With this broadcast address, all sorts > of other things work (timed, rwhod, nmbd etc.), assuming that you've > got a proxy arp setup on the other end. Proxy arp is a hack. We shouldn't encourage using hacks. If people are interested in using hacks, they should have more work to be done than those who are interested in clean setups. (Sure, like all hacks, there are situations why proxy arp can be useful. vfork() is another example of a useful hack. Recommending proxy arp as a general method is ugly. Setup correct IP routing instead.) > Of course, this implies that the destination address isn't actually > required - as with a real network. `Real' networks have broadcast addresses, but aren't point-to-point. `Real' networks can't share the same local adress for different interfaces, p2p interfaces can. `Real' networks have native broadcasting, p2p interfaces don't. p2p interfaces always connect to just one remote address, that's why they are called by this name. ;) -- cheers, J"org joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de -- http://www.sax.de/~joerg/ -- NIC: JW11-RIPE Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19980104193137.01479>