Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 18:38:52 +0600 (ALMT) From: Boris Popov <bp@butya.kz> To: Peter Wemm <peter@netplex.com.au> Cc: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk>, Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/net if_loop.c if_var.h Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0101291833480.41168-100000@lion.butya.kz> In-Reply-To: <200101291229.f0TCTe450561@mobile.wemm.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 29 Jan 2001, Peter Wemm wrote: > > BGP, OSPF and others like to have a stable IP# for the router-id, putting > > that on a loopback interface is as close as you get to an interface which > > is always "up". > > Speaking of which.. I've seen quite a few places where they drop the > IFF_LOOPBACK flag on the non-primary interface so that it "looks" > like a real interface.. I think there is even a PR on it. I considered > turning of IFF_LOOPBACK for the non-primary lo0, but decided not to this > time. Anybody know anything about this and why this might be done? IPX aware programs can enumerate local interfaces list to get information about so-called "internal networks". In addition IPX-stack code uses IFF_LOOPBACK to disable broadcasts on internal networks. -- Boris Popov http://www.butya.kz/~bp/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.21.0101291833480.41168-100000>