From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Mar 4 14:13:33 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33CCB106566C for ; Tue, 4 Mar 2008 14:13:33 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd@mail.gbch.net) Received: from gw.gbch.net (gw.yaxom.com [59.167.217.197]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 165528FC20 for ; Tue, 4 Mar 2008 14:13:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd@mail.gbch.net) Received: (qmail 11848 invoked from network); 4 Mar 2008 23:46:49 +1000 Received: from joker.yaxom.com (172.16.1.10) by iliad.yaxom.com with SMTP; 4 Mar 2008 23:46:49 +1000 Received: (qmail 88197 invoked by uid 1001); 4 Mar 2008 23:46:48 +1000 Message-ID: Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 23:46:48 +1000 From: Greg Black To: "Chris H." References: <200803040619.m246Jbja018523@drugs.dv.isc.org> <20080304000320.msp5bfrytc0wsowg@webmail.1command.com> <1204625690.2126.181.camel@localhost> <20080304024831.fh4h1s3hggg444c0@webmail.1command.com> <20080304110042.GB84355@eos.sc1.parodius.com> <20080304033914.hbevsjq9gkc0o4os@webmail.1command.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080304033914.hbevsjq9gkc0o4os@webmail.1command.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i; gjb-muttsend.sh 1.7 2004-10-05 X-Uptime: 61 days X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 6.2-RELEASE-p5 i386 X-Location: Brisbane, Australia; 27.49841S 152.98439E X-URL: http://www.gbch.net/gjb.html X-Blog: http://www.gbch.net/gjb/blog/ X-Image-URL: http://www.gbch.net/gjb/gjb-auug048.gif X-PGP-Key-Fingerprint: EBB2 2A92 A79D 1533 AC00 3C46 5D83 B6FB 4B04 B7D6 X-Request-PGP: http://www.gbch.net/keys/4B04B7D6.asc Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: What's new on the 127.0.0/24 block in 7? X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2008 14:13:33 -0000 On 2008-03-04, Chris H. wrote: > Yes, adding an entry in /etc/rc.conf that provides 254 IP's now > reveals: > lo0: flags=8049 metric 0 mtu 16384 > inet6 ::1 prefixlen 128 inet6 fe80::1%lo0 prefixlen 64 > scopeid 0x3 inet 127.0.0.1 netmask 0xffffff00 > > as opposed to: 0xffffffff. If you think the above shows evidence of providing 254 IP addresses, it's really time either to catch up on some sleep or learn how these things work. > Anyway, my /real/ reason for starting all this, was to figure out > why the 2 machines act so differently. I can assure you that I > have spent the entire day attempting to figure out if any > difference had crept into any of the server configs. But could > find none. The fact that you could not find the difference(s) is no evidence that there are none. It's abundantly clear from this very lengthy and often almost content-free discussion that you are either so tired and frantic that your brain has seized up or that you really don't understand this stuff as well as you think. (The clear evidence is that you have no idea of the meaning of assigning and IP address to an interface versus the meaning of an IP address given as a reply to a name lookup -- yet you continue to insist that you do have such an understanding.) If you could give a clear and complete description of what is really happening, without any of your own theories clouding that description, somebody clueful might be able to see just what is the obvious factor you have missed. As things stand, you are just going around in big unproductive circles and giving the rest of us no useful information to help you with. None of the above is intended as a flame, but it's really time to take stock and make a serious attempt to provide all the data so that those who can help are able to understand the problem. Greg