Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2001 12:52:57 -0400 (EDT) From: Garrett Wollman <wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> To: "Daniel C. Sobral" <daniel.sobral@tcoip.com.br> Cc: net@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: RTM_INFO Message-ID: <200108161652.f7GGqvK54639@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> In-Reply-To: <3B7BC5CE.7040906@tcoip.com.br> References: <3B7BC5CE.7040906@tcoip.com.br>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
<<On Thu, 16 Aug 2001 10:08:30 -0300, "Daniel C. Sobral" <daniel.sobral@tcoip.com.br> said: > Another question... when the interface goes up and an RTM_INFO message > is generated, shouldn't the interface addresses be passed? No; there is enough information in the RTM_IFINFO message for a listener to determine which interface is being referred to. At least on my machine it is in any case almost immediately preceded by an RTM_NEWADDR: # first we see the address being restored... got message of size 116 on Thu Aug 16 12:49:52 2001 RTM_NEWADDR: address being added to iface: len 116, metric 0, flags:<CLONING> sockaddrs: <NETMASK,IFP,IFA,BRD> (0) 0 ffff ff fxp0:0.d0.b7.54.3e.d3 khavrinen 18.24.4.255 # then the network route is added back... got message of size 172 on Thu Aug 16 12:49:52 2001 RTM_ADD: Add Route: len 172, pid: 0, seq 0, errno 0, flags:<UP,CLONING> locks: inits: sockaddrs: <DST,GATEWAY,NETMASK> 18.24.4.0 (255) ffff ffff ff # and now our interface comes back up got message of size 96 on Thu Aug 16 12:49:52 2001 RTM_IFINFO: iface status change: len 96, if# 1, flags:<UP,BROADCAST,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> -GAWollman To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200108161652.f7GGqvK54639>