From owner-freebsd-questions Fri Nov 6 18:25:07 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA10179 for freebsd-questions-outgoing; Fri, 6 Nov 1998 18:25:07 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from java.dpcsys.com (java.dpcsys.com [206.16.184.7]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id SAA10173 for ; Fri, 6 Nov 1998 18:25:05 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dan@dpcsys.com) Received: from localhost (dan@localhost) by java.dpcsys.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with SMTP id SAA04013; Fri, 6 Nov 1998 18:25:11 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 18:25:11 -0800 (PST) From: Dan Busarow To: Mike Tancsa cc: questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Alias lo0 or real interface In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19981106212103.00c287f0@sentex.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Fri, 6 Nov 1998, Mike Tancsa wrote: > One thing I am not clear on, when aliasing virtual interfaces for web > hosting purposes, should one choose lo0 or a real interface like fxp0 ? I > searched through the archives and lots of people mention or give examples > of aliasing the loopback interface, but I havent seen any explantions as to > why. Are there any pointers explaining this ? If you alias loopback then you need to manually add arp entries too, if you alias the real interface the arp entries are automatically added for you. Not sure what advantage there is in using lo0 Dan -- Dan Busarow 949 443 4172 Dana Point Communications, Inc. dan@dpcsys.com Dana Point, California 83 09 EF 59 E0 11 89 B4 8D 09 DB FD E1 DD 0C 82 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message