From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Aug 1 02:49:18 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 195B01065670; Sun, 1 Aug 2010 02:49:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from perryh@pluto.rain.com) Received: from agora.rdrop.com (agora.rdrop.com [IPv6:2607:f678:1010::34]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC5088FC14; Sun, 1 Aug 2010 02:49:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from agora.rdrop.com (66@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.13.1/8.12.7) with ESMTP id o712nGOF049844 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Sat, 31 Jul 2010 19:49:16 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from perryh@pluto.rain.com) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by agora.rdrop.com (8.13.1/8.12.9/Submit) with UUCP id o712nGge049843; Sat, 31 Jul 2010 19:49:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fbsd61 by pluto.rain.com (4.1/SMI-4.1-pluto-M2060407) id AA13209; Sat, 31 Jul 10 19:37:47 PDT Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2010 19:37:39 -0700 From: perryh@pluto.rain.com To: fli@shapeshifter.se Message-Id: <4c54ddf3.dbUwkfoxXwnHLLQz%perryh@pluto.rain.com> References: <201007311310.o6VDA3S6082887@freefall.freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <201007311310.o6VDA3S6082887@freefall.freebsd.org> User-Agent: nail 11.25 7/29/05 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-usb@freebsd.org, freebsd-net@freebsd.org, pilzableiter@web.de, bug-followup@freebsd.org Subject: Re: usb/149039: [uhso] Binding problem with uhso X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2010 02:49:18 -0000 > The following reply was made to PR usb/149039; it has been noted > by GNATS. > > From: Fredrik Lindberg > To: bug-followup@FreeBSD.org, pilzableiter@web.de > Cc: Hans Petter Selasky > Subject: Re: usb/149039: [uhso] Binding problem with uhso > Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2010 15:00:07 +0200 > > I apparently missed some interface flags (that really doesn't make > sense for this device, it's configured with a /32 mask so broadcast > etc can only be to itself) that the network stack wants to work > properly. Is a /32 mask even legal? Unless there's a special case involved, it ought to mean that there are no interfaces on the subnet other than this one, thus this interface has no peer to communicate with and might as well not exist. Adding net@ in hopes someone there knows what should happen.