Date: Fri, 19 Jul 1996 17:26:44 -0400 From: dennis@etinc.com (Dennis) To: Archie Cobbs <archie@whistle.com> Cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: interfaces, routes, etc. Message-ID: <199607192126.RAA28448@etinc.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> >> >It wouldn't be hard to modify "route" to accept either type of >> >argument... the question is, does the kernel store interface >> >routes using the actual address or using a pointer to the interface? >> >> You have to do it without trashing the "gateway" concept of passing >> info to devices. > >What do you mean exactly? I'm not that familiar with it. Maybe passing >a gateway of 0.0.0.0 could be an acceptable value for those interfaces >that don't need to know... The address itself makes more sense. So.. route add 200.11.1.1 -interface ppp0 could use 200.11.1.1 as the gateway address. Of course if you wanted to point networks at an interface this wouldnt work, or you'd have to specify a gateway first. For example: route add 200.11.1.1 -interface ppp0 route add -net 200.11.1 200.11.1.1 This way makes the most sense, because there's always a gateway (host) address to send to. Dennis ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Emerging Technologies, Inc. http://www.etinc.com Synchronous Communications Cards and Routers For Discriminating Tastes. 56k to T1 and beyond. Frame Relay, PPP, HDLC, and X.25 for BSD/OS, FreeBSD and LINUX
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199607192126.RAA28448>