On Mon, Dec 08, 2014 at 12:13:11PM +0100, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
On 04/12/14(Thu) 00:26, Alexander Bluhm wrote:
On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 12:58:35PM +0100, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
@@ -761,7 +754,17 @@ report:
error = EDQUOT;
goto flush;
On 04/12/14(Thu) 00:26, Alexander Bluhm wrote:
On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 12:58:35PM +0100, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
@@ -761,7 +754,17 @@ report:
error = EDQUOT;
goto flush;
}
- ifa = info.rti_ifa;
On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 12:58:35PM +0100, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
@@ -761,7 +754,17 @@ report:
error = EDQUOT;
goto flush;
}
- ifa = info.rti_ifa;
+ /*
+
Hello Florian,
On 26/11/14(Wed) 06:56, Florian Riehm wrote:
since OpenBSD 5.6 route change messages can change the interface of a route
(rt_ifa) even if a message doesn't seem to require it because of a changed
gateway or stuff like that.
I would like to ask if it's a regression or if the new
Hi tech,
since OpenBSD 5.6 route change messages can change the interface of a route
(rt_ifa) even if a message doesn't seem to require it because of a changed
gateway or stuff like that.
I would like to ask if it's a regression or if the new behavior is intended.
Example: (only for testing - it