From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue Jul 30 15:00:12 1996 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id PAA11216 for hackers-outgoing; Tue, 30 Jul 1996 15:00:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from etinc.com (etinc.com [204.141.244.98]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id PAA11181 for ; Tue, 30 Jul 1996 15:00:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dialup-usr11.etinc.com (dialup-usr11.etinc.com [204.141.95.132]) by etinc.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id SAA00355; Tue, 30 Jul 1996 18:02:21 -0400 Date: Tue, 30 Jul 1996 18:02:21 -0400 Message-Id: <199607302202.SAA00355@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: Terry Lambert From: dennis@etinc.com (Dennis) Subject: Re: Ethernet-like loopback & IPX Cc: hackers@freebsd.org Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Terry writes... >> While you may believe that the single address per IPX host is an >> error, it is fundamental to the protocol's design. I wouldn't >> characterize changing this as "fixing" it, unless it's the same way a >> veteranarian "fixes" something. > >You are mistaken. > >Probably, you don't know about "internal net addresses", which were >introduced in NetWare 3.x. > >Each NetWare server from 3.x onward (and thus each router) has the >concept of an internal net address. This is basically an internal >virtual network interface. > This is true, as long as the "address" that you chose is not the same as one of the cards in the box. Netware server's have their own network address, which makes routing more sane. Dennis ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Emerging Technologies, Inc. http://www.etinc.com Synchronous Communications Cards and Routers For Discriminating Tastes. 56k to T1 and beyond. Frame Relay, PPP, HDLC, and X.25 for BSD/OS, FreeBSD and LINUX