On Wed, 29 Mar 2000, Peter T. Breuer wrote:
> It's a very appropriate view. It's close to how NICs actually work.
> However, so what? It doesn't have any implications that I can şlainly
> see. Are you saying that ifconfig is broken, in that it shouldn't down
> the device when you down the alias, and it does? Or are you saying that
> ifconfig is right? I believe you are saying that the action of ifconfig
> is wrong - it should remove the alias instead of downing the device when
> we ask that the alias be downed? But I'm goshed if I can see that you
> are saying anything that has a definite consequence for the interface
> design.
Yes, ifconfig -was- broken, I don't know if it still is, I would guess it's
been fixed.
I stopped using ifconfig and route ages ago because I had similar problems.
I needed more granular control over the interfaces and routing tables than
ifconfig and route could give me.
My recommendation is to check on the latest version of net-tools, not the
latest that debian has. I also recommend reviewing 'ip' as a replacement
for ifconfig and route. Particularly when dealing with interface aliases or
quirky routing.
-d
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Mar 31 2000 - 21:00:23 EST