Re: (ASCEND) Default route on a Pipeline

To: Sean Eric Fagan <sef@kithrup.com>
Subject: Re: (ASCEND) Default route on a Pipeline
From: Phillip Vandry <vandry@Mlink.NET>
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 17:30:09 -0400 (EDT)
cc: ascend-users@bungi.com
In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 10 Jul 1998 14:24:26 EDT." <199807102124.OAA09598@kithrup.com>
Sender: owner-ascend-users@max.bungi.com

> In article <199807101747.NAA00568.kithrup.ascend-users@Iodine.Mlink.NET> you wr
> ite:
> >It would be better if you set the netmask on that to /32. I don't think
> >that having a route to 127.0.0.0/8 is a good thing.
> 
> Uh, why not?
> 
> 	ifconfig lo0
> 	lo0: flags=8049<UP,LOOPBACK,RUNNING,MULTICAST> mtu 16384
> 		inet 127.0.0.1 netmask 0xff000000 
> 		atalk 0.0 range 0-0 phase 2
> 
> The loopback device is 127.0.0.0/8 on systems that have it, after all... :)

Agreed, a 127/8 route is normal, depending on the IP stack. However if
it exists, it should be the route to the lo0 interface (or a blackhole
route, or something else, again, depending on the IP stack). It should
not be a route out a wan interface, as it would be in this case.

-Phil
++ Ascend Users Mailing List ++
To unsubscribe:	send unsubscribe to ascend-users-request@bungi.com
To get FAQ'd:	<http://www.nealis.net/ascend/faq>

Prev by Date: Re: (ASCEND) Max4004 question
Next by Date: Re: (ASCEND) Analog MP on TNT
Prev by thread: Re: (ASCEND) Default route on a Pipeline
Next by thread: (ASCEND) Re: ascend-users-digest V96 #1234
Index(es):
- Main
- Thread