seebs@plethora.net writes:
> In message <199809291606.MAA25690@jekyll.piermont.com>, "Perry E. Metzger" wr
it
> es:
> >A PPP connection is point to point. What would it *mean* for a netmask 
> >to be applied to such a network? ARP doesn't work on PPP -- nor does
> >any other address resolution mechanism.
> 
> What I would mean by it is "the remote address, and everything within the
> implied netblock, is across this link".

I believe that is what a routing table is generally used for, is  it not?

> Basically, the situation is that
> one of my dialups is really a gateway for a network of about 16 computers,
> and rather than having to muck with routes, I'd like to just say "when
> this link is up, this whole block is across it".

Why is "route add foo" harder than setting a netmask, especially when
what you are trying to do is set a route, not a netmask on an
interface?

Perry