)
Fcc: +sent-mail
On Thu, Apr 07, 2005 at 12:59:19PM +1000, Anand Kumria wrote:
On Wed, Apr 06, 2005 at 10:35:36AM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
That's not buggy:
Yes it is, if this only existed in /etc/network/interfaces
iface eth0 inet6 static
Oh, you're thinking of the Debian
On Thu, Apr 07, 2005 at 01:55:51PM +1000, Anand Kumria wrote:
[Disabling zeroconf when an address is allocated otherwise.]
Actually I read it entirely the other way -- the RFC recommends
*against* doing it the way that has been done on these platforms.
The behaviour it's complaining about is
On Sun, Apr 03, 2005 at 03:15:23PM +0200, Thomas Hood wrote:
I am reading RFC 3927 Dynamic Configuration of IPv4 Link-Local
Addresses and I notice that it says.
IPv4 Link-Local addresses should therefore only be used where stable,
routable addresses are not available (such as on ad
On Sun, Apr 03, 2005 at 03:28:24PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
On Sun, Apr 03, 2005 at 03:15:23PM +0200, Thomas Hood wrote:
I am beginning to think that zeroconf should, in the ifupdown world,
either be a distinct configuration method or an option for the dhcp
method.
It would be helpful
On Wed, Apr 06, 2005 at 07:06:21PM +1000, Anand Kumria wrote:
On Sun, Apr 03, 2005 at 03:28:24PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
It would be helpful if the program were to monitor the configuration of
the interface and only bring up a zeroconf address in the absence of any
other configuration
On Wed, Apr 06, 2005 at 11:04:25AM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
On Wed, Apr 06, 2005 at 07:06:21PM +1000, Anand Kumria wrote:
On Sun, Apr 03, 2005 at 03:28:24PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
It would be helpful if the program were to monitor the configuration of
the interface and only bring up a
On Sun, Apr 03, 2005 at 05:21:41PM +0200, Thomas Hood wrote:
For the time being I think that the cleanest thing to do is to add a
zeroconf method to the inet and inet6 address families. Initially the
Note that zeroconf should not be used with IPv6 - that includes its own
link local allocation
7 matches
Mail list logo
