Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2000 15:07:35 +0100 From: Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at> To: nik@freebsd.org Cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: No route for 127/8 to lo0 (?) Message-ID: <E12b25H-000EWt-00@fanf.eng.demon.net> In-Reply-To: <20000331125739.A97865@catkin.nothing-going-on.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Nik Clayton <nik@freebsd.org> wrote: > >I thought that 127/8 was the "local net", and that packets sent to any of >those addresses would go via the loopback interface. That seems to be >how Linux and Windows 98 do things (the only systems I can check this on >at the moment). Assuming that's the case, why does FreeBSD only add a >a host route to 127.0.0.1, and not a network route for 127/8? I did some further investigation to see how old this oddity is and it seems to be the way BSD has always handled the loopback interface. There's an explicit exclusion in the interface initialization code in in.c that gives loopback interfaces a host route instead of the network route that a normal interface gets and it's been that way for 15 years. Tony. -- f.a.n.finch fanf@demon.net dot@dotat.at 408 overlarge underplug afterburn To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?E12b25H-000EWt-00>