From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon Nov 11 16:53:07 1996 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id QAA02389 for hackers-outgoing; Mon, 11 Nov 1996 16:53:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from etinc.com (et-gw-fr1.etinc.com [204.141.244.98]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id QAA02373 for ; Mon, 11 Nov 1996 16:53:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from ntws (ntws.etinc.com [204.141.95.142]) by etinc.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id TAA04679; Mon, 11 Nov 1996 19:57:27 -0500 Date: Mon, 11 Nov 1996 19:57:27 -0500 Message-Id: <199611120057.TAA04679@etinc.com> X-Sender: dennis@etinc.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 2.0.3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: roberto@keltia.freenix.fr (Ollivier Robert) From: dennis@etinc.com (dennis) Subject: Re: Setting PPP netmask! HOW! Cc: hackers@freebsd.org Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk According to a bunch of people.... >According to Daniel O'Callaghan: >> and is totally unnecessary, as Denis says. Simply put, the difference is >> that you are running a ppp link within a single IP network (happens to be >> class C), while James is running a ppp link between two distinct IP networks. >> You: 193.56.58.20 --> 193.56.58.234 >> James: 203.16.20.1 --> 203.8.105.20 It still doesnt make a difference....setting up routing over the PPP link and defining the netmask of the serial line are two different things... the bottom line is that you are using direct routes to hosts (not via a net) when getting from here to there on the link itself. From a routing perspective (where the issue is next hop), the next hop is the host at the end of a Point to point modeled network rather than a gateway on a network or subnetted network. Defining it as a network is stupid, because there is no net...there are only 2 peers. Dennis