From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jun 20 21:30:26 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A34EC16A520 for ; Sun, 20 Jun 2004 21:30:26 +0000 (GMT) Received: from sax.sax.de (sax.sax.de [193.175.26.33]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED0F343D5A for ; Sun, 20 Jun 2004 21:30:09 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from j@uriah.heep.sax.de) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by sax.sax.de (8.9.3/8.9.3) with UUCP id XAA12725; Sun, 20 Jun 2004 23:30:08 +0200 (CEST) Received: from uriah.heep.sax.de (localhost.heep.sax.de [127.0.0.1]) by uriah.heep.sax.de (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i5KLTafK030691; Sun, 20 Jun 2004 23:29:36 +0200 (MET DST) (envelope-from j@uriah.heep.sax.de) Received: (from j@localhost) by uriah.heep.sax.de (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i5KLTaJg030690; Sun, 20 Jun 2004 23:29:36 +0200 (MET DST) (envelope-from j) Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 23:29:36 +0200 From: Joerg Wunsch To: Roman Kurakin Message-ID: <20040620232936.D13428@uriah.heep.sax.de> References: <40D4C79B.2050400@cronyx.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <40D4C79B.2050400@cronyx.ru>; from rik@cronyx.ru on Sun, Jun 20, 2004 at 03:09:15AM +0400 X-Phone: +49-351-2012 669 X-PGP-Fingerprint: DC 47 E6 E4 FF A6 E9 8F 93 21 E0 7D F9 12 D6 4E X-GnuPG-Fingerprint: 5E84 F980 C3CA FD4B B584 1070 F48C A81B 69A8 5873 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-29.3 required=7.5 tests=EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO,REFERENCES,REPLY_WITH_QUOTES, USER_AGENT_MUTT version=2.53 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.53 (1.174.2.15-2003-03-30-exp) cc: net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: if_sppp X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: Joerg Wunsch List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 21:30:26 -0000 As Roman Kurakin wrote: > Problem: > If we have max_failure < MAXALIVECNT*5 we will > send conf-rej for magic. > Solution: > Loopback could be treated as a special case and > thus we may not count it as a failure. Can you explain a little more, please? The patch is simple enough, yes, but offhand I don't know what's the actual problem resulting out of the above situation. -- cheers, J"org .-.-. --... ...-- -.. . DL8DTL http://www.sax.de/~joerg/ NIC: JW11-RIPE Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)