Re: 2.1.15 vs. "route"

Matthias Urlichs (smurf@noris.de)
17 Dec 1996 04:46:18 +0100

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: Chad Wagner: "Oops"
Previous message: Kai Schulte: "pre-16"
Maybe in reply to: Bob Tracy - TDS: "2.1.15 vs. "route""

In linux.dev.kernel, article <Pine.LNX.3.95.961215181031.2131B-100000@random.sp.org>,
The Deviant <deviant@pooh-corner.com> writes:
>
> If you specify
>
> random:~# route add default gw 152.52.28.23 ppp0
>
> it become 0.0.0.0, as it should, but if you do
>
> random:~# route add 0.0.0.0 gw 152.52.28.23 netmask 0.0.0.0 ppp0
>
> it adds it as 255.255.255.255 (which isn't correct).
>
What if you say

> random:~# route add -net 0.0.0.0 gw 152.52.28.23 netmask 0.0.0.0 ppp0

/sbin/route should add the -net flag automagically, IMHO, if a netmask !=
255.255.255.255 is specified.

-- UFO'S are REAL. The Air Force doesn't exist.

-- 
Matthias Urlichs         \  noris network GmbH  /  Xlink-POP Nürnberg 
Schleiermacherstraße 12   \   Linux+Internet   /   EMail: urlichs@noris.de
90491 Nürnberg (Germany)   \    Consulting+Programming+Networking+etc'ing
   PGP: 1024/4F578875   1B 89 E2 1C 43 EA 80 44  15 D2 29 CF C6 C7 E0 DE
       Click <A HREF="http://info.noris.de/~smurf/finger">here</A>.    42

Next message: Chad Wagner: "Oops"
Previous message: Kai Schulte: "pre-16"
Maybe in reply to: Bob Tracy - TDS: "2.1.15 vs. "route""