Subject: Re: isolated "internal" network?
To: Thor Lancelot Simon <email@example.com>
From: Florian Heigl <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 09/14/2006 02:33:05
On Wed, Sep 13, 2006 at 04:59:18PM -0400, Thor Lancelot Simon wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 13, 2006 at 07:50:46AM -0400, Greg Troxel wrote:
> > Probably lo(4) needs bridge support, and adding that would be the
> > right thing really.
> I think this is a terrible idea. Why should we force loopback to
> emulate an Ethernet device just so we can bridge it? It is not an
> Ethernet device and we should not pretend that it is one.
That's a point I can't argue.
It seems tap does the proper thing and my loopback idea was wrong,
I never had really thought about the implications bridging had.
florian heigl http://deranfangvomen.de/
"ja, ja, ja, ja, ja, oh, oh, oh, oh scheise. oh. oh fuck."
-- the sound of a leased line multiplexer failing for the second time
just after things looked ok again (via a workmate at the phone)