From owner-freebsd-current Sun Aug 13 22:51:07 1995 Return-Path: current-owner Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.FreeBSD.org (8.6.11/8.6.6) id WAA00390 for current-outgoing; Sun, 13 Aug 1995 22:51:07 -0700 Received: from irz301.inf.tu-dresden.de (irz301.inf.tu-dresden.de [141.76.1.11]) by freefall.FreeBSD.org (8.6.11/8.6.6) with SMTP id WAA00366 for ; Sun, 13 Aug 1995 22:51:03 -0700 Received: from sax.sax.de by irz301.inf.tu-dresden.de with SMTP (5.67b+/DEC-Ultrix/4.3) id AA17792; Mon, 14 Aug 1995 07:51:00 +0200 Received: by sax.sax.de (8.6.11/8.6.12-s1) with UUCP id HAA07997; Mon, 14 Aug 1995 07:51:00 +0200 Received: (from j@localhost) by uriah.heep.sax.de (8.6.11/8.6.9) id HAA11158; Mon, 14 Aug 1995 07:42:40 +0200 From: J Wunsch Message-Id: <199508140542.HAA11158@uriah.heep.sax.de> Subject: Re: ioctl(SIOCAIFADDR): File exists To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Date: Mon, 14 Aug 1995 07:42:39 +0200 (MET DST) Cc: kieber@sax.de (Ulf Kieber) Reply-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <40mduf$fvb$1@haywire.DIALix.COM> from "Peter Wemm" at Aug 14, 95 10:55:11 am Reply-To: joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de (Joerg Wunsch) X-Phone: +49-351-2012 669 X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Length: 919 Sender: current-owner@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk As Peter Wemm wrote: > > There was a "feature" in 2.0.5 that meant that the local address of a > point-to-point link could not be within the same network as any other > interface, with the local subnet size being decided by the netmask of > the remote network. This sounds like it could be it (even though it's surprising that i can log into the machine succesfully using another address, while i've always been unsuccesful with the same address -- the other address has been just 4 above). > There is an undocumented option in the kernel, called something like > P2P_LOCALADDR_SHARE, which works around the problem (with a slight > bug) after I made a lot of noise about this "feature" before 2.0.5 was > released. What's the `slight bug'? Can we use it nevertheless? -- cheers, J"org joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de -- http://www.sax.de/~joerg/ Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)