From owner-freebsd-bugs Thu Jan 1 08:36:58 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id IAA19615 for bugs-outgoing; Thu, 1 Jan 1998 08:36:58 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-bugs) Received: from awfulhak.demon.co.uk (awfulhak.demon.co.uk [158.152.17.1]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA19602; Thu, 1 Jan 1998 08:36:37 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from brian@awfulhak.org) Received: from gate.lan.awfulhak.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by awfulhak.demon.co.uk (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA17803; Thu, 1 Jan 1998 13:25:33 GMT (envelope-from brian@gate.lan.awfulhak.org) Message-Id: <199801011325.NAA17803@awfulhak.demon.co.uk> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0.1 12/23/97 To: John-Mark Gurney cc: freebsd-bugs@hub.freebsd.org, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, joerg@freebsd.org Subject: Re: kern/5404: slXX slip (tun & ppp) interfaces always point to point In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 31 Dec 1997 17:30:01 PST." <199801010130.RAA10049@hub.freebsd.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Thu, 01 Jan 1998 13:25:32 +0000 From: Brian Somers Sender: owner-freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk [cc'd to joerg and freebsd-hackers] > The following reply was made to PR kern/5404; it has been noted by GNATS. > > From: John-Mark Gurney > To: Matthew Dillon > Cc: FreeBSD-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.ORG > Subject: Re: kern/5404: slXX slip interfaces always point to point > Date: Wed, 31 Dec 1997 17:23:58 +875200 > [.....] > or are you wanting to do something like: > > +-------------+ +-------------+ > | machine a |-------| machine b |---- rest of 192.168.3.x > | 192.168.3.2 | | 192.168.3.1 | > +-------------+ +-------------+ > > and trying to get machine a on the same network as machine b? > > if your going for the second one, you need proxyarp on machine b... > I've actually done something similar to this before... actually my > terminal server is setup like that... the ethernet is 192.168.0.x.. and > the ip's for the dialin's are 192.168.40-60 or so... [.....] This ties in with a recent discussion on -hackers: > Brian Somers wrote: > > > I agree, and I'll implement the change unless someone has a good > > reason not to..... any takers ? > > I think it's really best to just not display the netmask in the output > of ifconfig iff IFF_POINTOPOINT is set. > > Routes to the remote end apart from the implied host route seem to be > dangerous to me, and they break the current behaviour (i.e. could > cause surprises for people who are used to how it's done now). It's > not always that the IP address of the remote end is indeed identical > with the remote network address. > > -- > cheers, J"org I intended to remove the possibility of netmasks and broadcast addresses for pointopoint links, but retrospectively, this will break the ability to attach to a peer that proxy arps for you (well, it's already broken). I would suggest (and I'm willing to do it) adding the ability to use SIOCSIFPOINTOPOINT and SIOCGIFPOINTOPOINT on sl* ppp* and tun*. The default is that these interfaces are pointopoint, but you can change that by issuing the `S' ioctl. Additionally, I'd change ifconfig so that it doesn't display a netmask & broadcast address when the POINTOPOINT flag is set. I can then implement the ability to make these interfaces non-pointopoint in their respective programs - if configured that way. None of the existing code would break as the defaults are the same. Comments ? -- Brian , , Don't _EVER_ lose your sense of humour....