From owner-freebsd-net  Fri Mar 23 23:29:26 2001
Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Received: from shuttle.wide.toshiba.co.jp (shuttle.wide.toshiba.co.jp [202.249.10.124])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 4D59D37B719; Fri, 23 Mar 2001 23:29:21 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from jinmei@isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp)
Received: from localhost (shuttle.wide.toshiba.co.jp [202.249.10.124])
	by shuttle.wide.toshiba.co.jp (8.9.1+3.1W/8.9.1) with ESMTP id QAA10323;
	Sat, 24 Mar 2001 16:30:05 +0900 (JST)
Date: Sat, 24 Mar 2001 02:18:36 +0900
Message-ID: <y7vofusqu8j.wl@condor2.isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp>
From: JINMEI Tatuya / =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCP0BMQEMjOkgbKEI=?= <jinmei@isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp>
To: "David E. Cross" <crossd@cs.rpi.edu>
Cc: Jeroen Ruigrok/Asmodai <asmodai@wxs.nl>,
	Hajimu UMEMOTO <ume@FreeBSD.ORG>, net@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: gif(4) question 
In-Reply-To: <200103222102.QAA25135@cs.rpi.edu>
References: <asmodai@wxs.nl>
	 <20010322214413.A5116@daemon.ninth-circle.org>
	 <200103222102.QAA25135@cs.rpi.edu>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.5.8 (Smooth) Emacs/21.0 Mule/5.0 (SAKAKI)
Organization: Research & Development Center, Toshiba Corp., Kawasaki, Japan.
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.13.7 - "Awazu")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
X-Dispatcher: imput version 980905(IM100)
Lines: 31
Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org

>>>>> On Thu, 22 Mar 2001 16:02:10 -0500, 
>>>>> "David E. Cross" <crossd@cs.rpi.edu> said:

> Why is routing done via the ::1 and 127.0.0.1 network addresses?  I notice
> for "normal" interfaces it is bound directly to "link#2" and such. 

It's just a characteristic (or ristriction if you want to say that) of
BSD's IPv4 routing on point-to-point interfaces.  I don't know the
deep rationale.

> I realize I don't really know what I am talking about here, but, it
> seems that binding it to the link is more efficient than having it go
> through the loopback interface.

I'm not sure what you mean "efficient" here.  But using addresses to
install a route to the loopback interface does not decrease the output
performance.

> Also, it will work in cases where the 
> loopback is not defined (don't ask... just don't ask)

That's not true.  In the BSD's routing architecture, if  you want to
install a route of a particular address family to an interface, you
need at least one interface address of the address family on the
interface.  The address need not to be the well-defined "loopback
address", though.

					JINMEI, Tatuya
					Communication Platform Lab.
					Corporate R&D Center, Toshiba Corp.
					jinmei@isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message