Date: Mon, 21 Sep 1998 11:53:49 +0200 (SAT) From: Graham Wheeler <gram@cdsec.com> To: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: ifconfig alias weirdness Message-ID: <199809210953.LAA04029@cdsec.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi all On a different note to the hang/reboot, I've noticed the following which may be a bug, or perhaps I'm just missing something (or maybe I'm just being pedantic!). If I want to set up an alias on an interface with a subnet, there are two different behaviours I observe depending on whether or not the netmask is specified with the alias. If I use: ifconfig ed0 inet 196.37.78.96 netmask 255.255.255.240 up ifconfig ed0 inet 196.37.78.99 alias then the routes get messed up. After the first ifconfig the routes are correct: 196.37.78.96/26 link#1 But after the alias we have: 196.37.78 link#1 196.37.78.96/26 link#1 which indicates that an implicit netmask of 255.255.255.0 has been used. On the other hand, if I use: ifconfig ed0 inet 196.37.78.99 netmask 255.255.255.240 alias then the alias is right, and the bad route doesn't get added; however, ifconfig prints an error: `SIOCIFADDR: file exists'. I can live with the error message, but it is a bit disturbing. -- Dr Graham Wheeler E-mail: gram@cdsec.com Citadel Data Security Phone: +27(21)23-6065/6/7 Internet/Intranet Network Specialists Mobile: +27(83)253-9864 Firewalls/Virtual Private Networks Fax: +27(21)24-3656 Data Security Products WWW: http://www.cdsec.com/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199809210953.LAA04029>