Subject: Re: Problems with in_addprefix not adding a prefix and notifying the routing socket
To: Martin Husemann <>
From: None <>
List: tech-net
Date: 09/17/2001 08:28:10
>> This may be due to the way this interface/route is setup: initially (with no
>> PPP connection) the interface is assigned the address
>Oh, I see: this is because of the remote address is not updated and stays
>at, matching the routing entry?
>So fixing if_spppsubr.c to update the remote address during IPCP negotiation
>and maybe restoring it to (i.e. the saved original one) later should
>fix this, IIUC.
>Am I correct?

	I don't think there's a behavior difference in 1.5 and current
	with respect to routing socket messages.  are there?