From owner-freebsd-questions  Sat Apr 13 12:28:58 1996
Return-Path: owner-questions
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id MAA21108
          for questions-outgoing; Sat, 13 Apr 1996 12:28:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from bubba.tribe.com ([205.184.207.7])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id MAA21099
          for <freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.org>; Sat, 13 Apr 1996 12:28:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from archie@localhost) by bubba.tribe.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id MAA23392; Sat, 13 Apr 1996 12:28:39 -0700
From: Archie Cobbs <archie@tribe.com>
Message-Id: <199604131928.MAA23392@bubba.tribe.com>
Subject: Re: route -interface
To: msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au (Michael Smith)
Date: Sat, 13 Apr 1996 12:28:39 -0700 (PDT)
Cc: archie@tribe.com, freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.org
In-Reply-To: <199604130817.RAA09890@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au> from "Michael Smith" at Apr 13, 96 05:47:36 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-questions@FreeBSD.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk


> > What are the semantics of the "-interface" flag to the route(8) command,
> > with respect to point-to-point networks?  The man page states:
> 
> It's not designed for PTP interfaces.  Using route -interface
> causes the system to ARP for all destinations on that interface.
> 
> It's good for talking to ethernets with gateways that proxy-arp but 
> are prone to moving (or going down) without having to resort to running
> a routing daemon.
> 
> -- 
> ]] Mike Smith, Software Engineer        msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au    [[

Sounds logical now.. perhaps the man page could use a little enhancement.

-Archie

__________________________________________________________________________
Archie L. Cobbs, archie@tribe.com   *   Whistle Communications Corporation