Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2003 14:06:32 -0500 From: Hiten Pandya <hiten@unixdaemons.com> To: Brooks Davis <brooks@one-eyed-alien.net> Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Loopback device dillema Message-ID: <20030306190632.GB55182@unixdaemons.com> In-Reply-To: <20030306110011.B27325@Odin.AC.HMC.Edu> References: <20030306183854.GA47557@unixdaemons.com> <20030306110011.B27325@Odin.AC.HMC.Edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Brooks Davis (Thu, Mar 06, 2003 at 11:00:11AM -0800) wrote: > On Thu, Mar 06, 2003 at 01:38:54PM -0500, Hiten Pandya wrote: > > To conclude, I would like to see the loopback device made default, and > > if this is not agreed upon, then someone needs to fix case when loopback > > device is not in the kernel config, and is going to be loaded as a > > module. > > What is gained by making loopback default? It's true that you need a > loopback device, but that's a bug not a feature. Right, I do not have a problem with that, but that just means someone needs to fix that in netinet/if_ether.c, and netinet/igmp.c. -- Hiten Pandya (hiten@unixdaemons.com, hiten@uk.FreeBSD.org) http://www.unixdaemons.com/~hiten/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030306190632.GB55182>