From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon Nov 11 13:06:51 1996 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id NAA09965 for hackers-outgoing; Mon, 11 Nov 1996 13:06:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from rocky.mt.sri.com (rocky.mt.sri.com [206.127.76.100]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id NAA09946 for ; Mon, 11 Nov 1996 13:06:45 -0800 (PST) Received: (from nate@localhost) by rocky.mt.sri.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id OAA21257; Mon, 11 Nov 1996 14:06:36 -0700 (MST) Date: Mon, 11 Nov 1996 14:06:36 -0700 (MST) Message-Id: <199611112106.OAA21257@rocky.mt.sri.com> From: Nate Williams To: roberto@keltia.freenix.fr (Ollivier Robert) Cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Setting PPP netmask! HOW! In-Reply-To: References: <199611111453.JAA01072@etinc.com> Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Ollivier Robert writes: > According to dennis: > > market. I believe that the netmask is meaningless on a PTP interface, > > so even if you get it to display the way you want you won't have > > achieved much of anything. > > That's not true. No, Dennis is correct. PPP (and all Point-Point links) use host routing, not subnet routing. You can use subnet routing over PTP links, but that's irrelevant of the netmask on the PPP link. > It would be impossible to send packets to my ethernet and to the Internet > thru the PPP at the same time if subnets were not handled correctly by > "pppd" (kernel PPP). Why? You simply setup the routing to send all traffic to each of the subnets to the PPP host which lives on that network. Nate