Re: No route for 127/8 to lo0 (?) - another use for loopback subn et?

2000-04-01 Thread Aleksandr A.Babaylov
Eric Peterson writes: [Charset iso-8859-1 unsupported, filtering to ASCII...] Tony Finch [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: Nik Clayton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I thought that 127/8 was the "local net", and that packets sent to any of those addresses would go via the loopback

Re: No route for 127/8 to lo0 (?) - another use for loopback subn et?

2000-04-01 Thread Ulf Zimmermann
On Sun, Apr 02, 2000 at 03:49:53AM +0400, Aleksandr A.Babaylov wrote: Eric Peterson writes: [Charset iso-8859-1 unsupported, filtering to ASCII...] Tony Finch [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: Nik Clayton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I thought that 127/8 was the "local net", and that