--==_Exmh_1495421864P
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

In message <573vt7$l7k@colwyn.owl.de>you write:
> I recently send a PR about "pppd" not accepting netmask 255.255.255.255.
> As a result I got some mails saying me that netmasks are irrelevant for
> PPP connections - I believed that too before I discovered this problem -
> or that netmask 255.255.255.255 for an interface is always wrong.

Who is arguing on that?  Point to point interfaces are implying 
255.255.255.255 netmasks, i.e. there is a host route on the interface.

> tron@jehova:~#ifconfig ppp0 netmask 255.255.255.255

this is what I have in my /etc/ppp/ip-up script.  Without it, I was never able 
to route to my downstream sites that are in the same subnet as my ethernet.

Gruesse
       Oskar

 ==============================================================================
 					Tragbar ist, was nicht herunterfaellt.
						    oskar@zappa.unna.ping.de
 ==============================================================================



--==_Exmh_1495421864P
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE-----
Version: 2.6.3i

iQCVAwUBMpWmpLA63tqjeAhZAQEqwwQAvA+uSoCY6DOu8ktO6yeZ3/fHY+w1JvpK
ssPHkjAQ11GT2+o3+3E8gTrPXUOkWDnGaa7qaJMR0+saCr+lSEKnExaBdwtz3r4+
aTWkxPiKsuiZObo4VCYAfwzYiX+20VCwst7x98RmZgTV398WZIh9BG2nPMlkjVyh
py4P+Hq6P+o=
=w3hk
-----END PGP MESSAGE-----

--==_Exmh_1495421864P--