Subject: Re: Why is ifconfig.ae0 better than hostname.ae0?
To: Andrew Brown <email@example.com>
From: Ted Lemon <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 04/15/1997 11:31:30
> can we at least agree that packets bound for these addresses should all
> go through the loopback back to the local machine?
Yes, I agree completely.
> can we also not agree that setting the route using $hostname is bad
> for a machine that has multiple addresses (pot luck routing)?
> if we don't need the route added explicitly, why do we need it at all?
I believe it's a performance hack. The lo0 interface has an MTU of
32768, instead of 1500, and probably does less work on each packet.
> 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?
Netstart doesn't need to parse the ifconfig.xx files - they are
completely opaque to it. All it does is make sure that ifconfig is
called once for each line in each ifconfig.xx file.