From owner-freebsd-net Tue Apr 20 11:44:55 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from sasami.jurai.net (sasami.jurai.net [207.153.65.3]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A10DE15061 for ; Tue, 20 Apr 1999 11:44:53 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from winter@jurai.net) Received: from localhost (winter@localhost) by sasami.jurai.net (8.8.8/8.8.7) with SMTP id OAA00647; Tue, 20 Apr 1999 14:42:08 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1999 14:42:08 -0400 (EDT) From: "Matthew N. Dodd" To: David Greenman Cc: Paul Southworth , freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Interfaces don't go down when network is physically down In-Reply-To: <199904201814.LAA10552@implode.root.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Tue, 20 Apr 1999, David Greenman wrote: > For many of the ethernet interfaces, there isn't any indication that the > link is down. On the other hand, for the 100Mbps interfaces, it is possible > in some cases to get an interrupt from the PHY of the link status change. > We don't currently do anything with that, however. Should we? Is it acceptable for the driver to frob the IFF_UP flag when it gets an event that should be reflected by a state change of IFF_UP? -- | Matthew N. Dodd | 78 280Z | 75 164E | 84 245DL | FreeBSD/NetBSD/Sprite/VMS | | winter@jurai.net | This Space For Rent | ix86,sparc,m68k,pmax,vax | | http://www.jurai.net/~winter | Are you k-rad elite enough for my webpage? | To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message