Subject: Re: Why is ifconfig.ae0 better than hostname.ae0?
To: None <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Andrew Brown <email@example.com>
Date: 04/15/1997 14:11:21
> From: Perry E. Metzger
>>Andrew Brown writes:
>> >Not true. There may be more than one address per interface in each
>> >/etc/ifconfig.xxx file. Also, not every address is an IP address.
>> interfaces with more than one address? like ppp interfaces?
>Like all interfaces. There are machines these days with dozens of IP
>addresses running on one interface, and IPv6 goes so far as to
>institutionalize this, requiring that an interface respond to a number
>of differing addresses.
can we at least agree that packets bound for these addresses should all
go through the loopback back to the local machine? can we also not
agree that setting the route using $hostname is bad for a machine that
has multiple addresses (pot luck routing)? and do we not also see
that it seems to work for all "up" interfaces as it is even if they
do *not* have the explicit route through the loopback interface?
if we don't need the route added explicitly, why do we need it at all?
>> addresses that are not ip addresses? check $af to see if it says
>> "inet" before you add the route.
>Parsing begins to become a serious pain.
are inet addresses no longer going to be assigned this way? isn't
netstart supposed to be able to read the ifconfig.### files anyway?
doens't it "implicitly" know how to parse the file?
|-----< "CODE WARRIOR" >-----|
firstname.lastname@example.org (TheMan) * "ah! i see you have the internet
email@example.com that goes *ping*!"
firstname.lastname@example.org * "information is power -- share the wealth."