Agreed.
> By attaching a network to the interface (i.e, by specifying a
> non-trivial netmask), you tell the kernel to add an outgoing network
> route and also a broadcast route through the interface. Again,
> attached networks without routes or vice versa are semantical
> nonsense.
Agreed.
However,
By flagging an interface as 'pointopoint $otherhost', you tell the kernel
to add an outgoing route to $otherhost. Attaching a network route to a
fictitious class [ABC] network, and a corresponding broadcast route, is
semantical insanity.
Yet this is what the kernel does. What possible justification can there be for
the automatic creation of the route which I delete in the second line of this
script? ...
/sbin/ifconfig ippp0 158.152.16.50 pointopoint 158.152.1.222 -arp -broadcast up
/sbin/route del -net 158.152.0.0 netmask 255.255.0.0 dev ippp0
/sbin/route add 158.152.1.222 ippp0
/sbin/route add default gw 158.152.1.222
---- ---- ----
David Woodhouse David.Woodhouse@mvhi.com Office: (+44) 1223 810302
Project Leader, Process Information Systems Mobile: (+44) 976 658355
Axiom (Cambridge) Ltd., Swaffham Bulbeck, Cambridge, CB5 0NA, UK.
finger dwmw2@ferret.lmh.ox.ac.uk for PGP key.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/