Subject: Re: Why is ifconfig.ae0 better than hostname.ae0?
To: Ted Lemon <>
From: Andrew Brown <>
List: current-users
Date: 04/15/1997 14:42:43
>> 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.

is fo, shouldn't the kernel be checking to see if the address is on a
local interface and routing it more correctly (with the associated
mtu's and all)?

>> 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.

yes, i see that now.  it's been too long since i actually read it.  :)

|-----< "CODE WARRIOR" >-----| (TheMan)        * "ah!  i see you have the internet                               that goes *ping*!"      * "information is power -- share the wealth."