Garrett Wollman wrote:
> <<On Thu, 16 Aug 2001 10:08:30 -0300, "Daniel C. Sobral"
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
>
>>Another question... when the interface goes up and an RTM_INFO message
>>is generated, shouldn't the interface addresses be passed?
>>
>
> No; there is enough information in the RTM_IFINFO message for a
> listener to determine which interface is being referred to. At least
> on my machine it is in any case almost immediately preceded by an
> RTM_NEWADDR:
>
> # first we see the address being restored...
> got message of size 116 on Thu Aug 16 12:49:52 2001
> RTM_NEWADDR: address being added to iface: len 116, metric 0, flags:<CLONING>
> sockaddrs: <NETMASK,IFP,IFA,BRD>
> (0) 0 ffff ff fxp0:0.d0.b7.54.3e.d3 khavrinen 18.24.4.255
>
> # then the network route is added back...
> got message of size 172 on Thu Aug 16 12:49:52 2001
> RTM_ADD: Add Route: len 172, pid: 0, seq 0, errno 0, flags:<UP,CLONING>
> locks: inits:
> sockaddrs: <DST,GATEWAY,NETMASK>
> 18.24.4.0 (255) ffff ffff ff
>
> # and now our interface comes back up
> got message of size 96 on Thu Aug 16 12:49:52 2001
> RTM_IFINFO: iface status change: len 96, if# 1,
>flags:<UP,BROADCAST,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST>
Funny. I don't see RTM_NEWADDR being generated. Of course, no route is
added when the interface is simply brought up.
--
Daniel C. Sobral (8-DCS)
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Include me out.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
