Re: ifconfig alias: File Exists
In a message dated 10/24/04 11:18:14 AM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Is that new? You are right, that fixed it, but didn't think I had to do that before :( You get it because the guy who maintains ifconfig didn't have the foresight to realize the alias should imply a host mask, and also that the guy who coded the kernel code didn't think that assuming a host mask was reasonable. Welcome to open source. Love it and live with it. ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To assume makes an ass out of u and me. Ok, that out of the way, the config you assume should be coded into ifconfig and kernel is not 100% going to be used all the time. In fact I have multiple nets and have multiple netmask assigned on the one machine. If you actually READ man ifconfig it states that this should be set to what you assume it should be. It helps when people don't attack things they don't fully understand cause for many it might be a person's first view at what you are bashing. Unfortunately also, many people aren't smart enough to get a second opinion or to try beyond there first try or someone person's like yourselfs comments. As for the assume thing, speak for yourself. Your implication that there should be no defaults is quite asinine. If it doesn't work with no netmask specified, then its broken. Its not unreasonable to assume that if no netmask is provided, then a host mask (for an alias) is intended. In the absence of a netmask, the only assumption thats reasonable is a host mask. There are lots of assumptions made by ifconfig. It assumes that you only want the interface to have one address (as if you submit an address to an interface that already has one it explicitly deletes the other). Its not unreasonable to assume that, nor would it be unreasonable to assume that the intention was to add an alias. It would certainly be safer. And I understand it a lot better than you do. In today's world, assuming the natural mask (which is what ifconfig has done since the beginning of time) is wrong most of the time. Just because someone back in the 1970s decided to do it that way doesn't make it correct. One of the basic properties of a default setting is that it should work. ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: ifconfig alias: File Exists
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 25, 2004 4:59 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: ifconfig alias: File Exists In a message dated 10/24/04 11:18:14 AM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Is that new? You are right, that fixed it, but didn't think I had to do that before :( You get it because the guy who maintains ifconfig didn't have the foresight to realize the alias should imply a host mask, and also that the guy who coded the kernel code didn't think that assuming a host mask was reasonable. Welcome to open source. Love it and live with it. ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To assume makes an ass out of u and me. Ok, that out of the way, the config you assume should be coded into ifconfig and kernel is not 100% going to be used all the time. In fact I have multiple nets and have multiple netmask assigned on the one machine. If you actually READ man ifconfig it states that this should be set to what you assume it should be. It helps when people don't attack things they don't fully understand cause for many it might be a person's first view at what you are bashing. Unfortunately also, many people aren't smart enough to get a second opinion or to try beyond there first try or someone person's like yourselfs comments. As for the assume thing, speak for yourself. Your implication that there should be no defaults is quite asinine. If it doesn't work with no netmask specified, then its broken. Its not unreasonable to assume that if no netmask is provided, then a host mask (for an alias) is intended. In the absence of a netmask, the only assumption thats reasonable is a host mask. There are lots of assumptions made by ifconfig. It assumes that you only want the interface to have one address (as if you submit an address to an interface that already has one it explicitly deletes the other). Its not unreasonable to assume that, nor would it be unreasonable to assume that the intention was to add an alias. It would certainly be safer. And I understand it a lot better than you do. In today's world, assuming the natural mask (which is what ifconfig has done since the beginning of time) is wrong most of the time. Just because someone back in the 1970s decided to do it that way doesn't make it correct. One of the basic properties of a default setting is that it should work I find it very wrong to assume anything on a network interface. Assumptions on anything that could open up a security hole are very dangerous. ifconfig has a far greater ability than many things to open up security wholes that may get around an improperly setup firewall. I agree that some assumptions can easily be made and should be but not here. ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ifconfig alias: File Exists
In a message dated 10/19/04 3:51:33 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: # ifconfig fxp0 alias 200.46.204.9 ifconfig: ioctl (SIOCAIFADDR): File exists when I know for a fact that it hasn't been configured? you should use a netmask of 255.255.255.255 for ipv4 aliases. ifconfig fxp0 alias 200.46.204.9 netmask 255.255.255.255 Is that new? You are right, that fixed it, but didn't think I had to do that before :( You get it because the guy who maintains ifconfig didn't have the foresight to realize the alias should imply a host mask, and also that the guy who coded the kernel code didn't think that assuming a host mask was reasonable. Welcome to open source. Love it and live with it. ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: ifconfig alias: File Exists
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2004 5:13 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: ifconfig alias: File Exists In a message dated 10/19/04 3:51:33 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: # ifconfig fxp0 alias 200.46.204.9 ifconfig: ioctl (SIOCAIFADDR): File exists when I know for a fact that it hasn't been configured? you should use a netmask of 255.255.255.255 for ipv4 aliases. ifconfig fxp0 alias 200.46.204.9 netmask 255.255.255.255 Is that new? You are right, that fixed it, but didn't think I had to do that before :( You get it because the guy who maintains ifconfig didn't have the foresight to realize the alias should imply a host mask, and also that the guy who coded the kernel code didn't think that assuming a host mask was reasonable. Welcome to open source. Love it and live with it. ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To assume makes an ass out of u and me. Ok, that out of the way, the config you assume should be coded into ifconfig and kernel is not 100% going to be used all the time. In fact I have multiple nets and have multiple netmask assigned on the one machine. If you actually READ man ifconfig it states that this should be set to what you assume it should be. It helps when people don't attack things they don't fully understand cause for many it might be a person's first view at what you are bashing. Unfortunately also, many people aren't smart enough to get a second opinion or to try beyond there first try or someone person's like yourselfs comments. ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ifconfig alias: File Exists
On Tuesday 19 October 2004 20:50, Marc G. Fournier wrote: Is that new? You are right, that fixed it, but didn't think I had to do that before :( Well your the output from ifconfig fxp0 shows that the other aliases on the same subnet has a 200.46.204.0 have the netmask set has 0xff (e.g 255.255.255.255), so I wonder how you managed to add them otherwise... -- Cheers, Chris Howells -- [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web: http://chrishowells.co.uk, PGP ID: 0x33795A2C KDE/Qt/C++/PHP Developer: http://www.kde.org pgpcxGTQVMmFj.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: ifconfig alias: File Exists
Hi, On Tue, 19 Oct 2004, Marc G. Fournier wrote: On Tue, 19 Oct 2004, Christian Kratzer wrote: Hi, On Tue, 19 Oct 2004, Marc G. Fournier wrote: Why would I be getting: # ifconfig fxp0 alias 200.46.204.9 ifconfig: ioctl (SIOCAIFADDR): File exists when I know for a fact that it hasn't been configured? you should use a netmask of 255.255.255.255 for ipv4 aliases. ifconfig fxp0 alias 200.46.204.9 netmask 255.255.255.255 Is that new? You are right, that fixed it, but didn't think I had to do that before :( no it's been like that since I know of FreeBSD 2.0 and propably longer. The BSD ip stack adds a route to the connected network over the respective interface when you do an ifconfig. Using the same netmask on all aliases it will cause it to try to add the same route multiple times causing the error you saw. Greetings Christian -- Christian Kratzer [EMAIL PROTECTED] CK Software GmbHhttp://www.cksoft.de/ Phone: +49 7452 889 135 Fax: +49 7452 889 136 ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ifconfig alias: File Exists
Why would I be getting: # ifconfig fxp0 alias 200.46.204.9 ifconfig: ioctl (SIOCAIFADDR): File exists when I know for a fact that it hasn't been configured? # ping 200.46.204.9 PING 200.46.204.9 (200.46.204.9): 56 data bytes ^C --- 200.46.204.9 ping statistics --- 1 packets transmitted, 0 packets received, 100% packet loss there is nothing even in my arp cache: # arp -a | grep (200.46.204.9) # arp -a | grep (200.46.204.91) zer01.net (200.46.204.91) at 00:e0:81:21:d7:f6 on fxp0 [ethernet] Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664 ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: ifconfig alias: File Exists
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marc G. Fournier Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2004 12:28 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: ifconfig alias: File Exists Why would I be getting: # ifconfig fxp0 alias 200.46.204.9 ifconfig: ioctl (SIOCAIFADDR): File exists when I know for a fact that it hasn't been configured? # ping 200.46.204.9 PING 200.46.204.9 (200.46.204.9): 56 data bytes ^C --- 200.46.204.9 ping statistics --- 1 packets transmitted, 0 packets received, 100% packet loss there is nothing even in my arp cache: # arp -a | grep (200.46.204.9) # arp -a | grep (200.46.204.91) zer01.net (200.46.204.91) at 00:e0:81:21:d7:f6 on fxp0 [ethernet] Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664 What does the output of ifconfig fxp0 show before you try the alias? Kevin Glick ITS Manager Sterling Business Forms [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: ifconfig alias: File Exists
On Tue, 19 Oct 2004, Kevin Glick wrote: -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marc G. Fournier Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2004 12:28 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: ifconfig alias: File Exists Why would I be getting: # ifconfig fxp0 alias 200.46.204.9 ifconfig: ioctl (SIOCAIFADDR): File exists when I know for a fact that it hasn't been configured? # ping 200.46.204.9 PING 200.46.204.9 (200.46.204.9): 56 data bytes ^C --- 200.46.204.9 ping statistics --- 1 packets transmitted, 0 packets received, 100% packet loss there is nothing even in my arp cache: # arp -a | grep (200.46.204.9) # arp -a | grep (200.46.204.91) zer01.net (200.46.204.91) at 00:e0:81:21:d7:f6 on fxp0 [ethernet] Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664 What does the output of ifconfig fxp0 show before you try the alias? # ifconfig fxp0 fxp0: flags=8943UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,PROMISC,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST mtu 1500 inet 192.168.0.3 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 192.168.0.255 inet 200.46.204.4 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 200.46.204.255 inet 200.46.204.13 netmask 0x broadcast 200.46.204.13 inet 200.46.204.144 netmask 0x broadcast 200.46.204.144 inet 200.46.204.107 netmask 0x broadcast 200.46.204.107 inet 200.46.204.115 netmask 0x broadcast 200.46.204.115 inet 200.46.204.200 netmask 0x broadcast 200.46.204.200 inet 200.46.204.114 netmask 0x broadcast 200.46.204.114 inet 200.46.204.108 netmask 0x broadcast 200.46.204.108 inet 200.46.204.113 netmask 0x broadcast 200.46.204.113 inet 200.46.204.72 netmask 0x broadcast 200.46.204.72 inet 200.46.204.83 netmask 0x broadcast 200.46.204.83 inet 200.46.204.238 netmask 0x broadcast 200.46.204.238 inet 200.46.204.185 netmask 0x broadcast 200.46.204.185 inet 200.46.204.150 netmask 0x broadcast 200.46.204.150 inet 200.46.204.244 netmask 0x broadcast 200.46.204.244 inet 200.46.204.170 netmask 0x broadcast 200.46.204.170 inet 200.46.204.109 netmask 0x broadcast 200.46.204.109 ether 00:03:47:bd:67:66 media: Ethernet autoselect (100baseTX full-duplex) status: active Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664 ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ifconfig alias: File Exists
Hi, On Tue, 19 Oct 2004, Marc G. Fournier wrote: Why would I be getting: # ifconfig fxp0 alias 200.46.204.9 ifconfig: ioctl (SIOCAIFADDR): File exists when I know for a fact that it hasn't been configured? you should use a netmask of 255.255.255.255 for ipv4 aliases. ifconfig fxp0 alias 200.46.204.9 netmask 255.255.255.255 Greetings Christian -- Christian Kratzer [EMAIL PROTECTED] CK Software GmbHhttp://www.cksoft.de/ Phone: +49 7452 889 135 Fax: +49 7452 889 136 ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ifconfig alias: File Exists
On Tue, 19 Oct 2004, Christian Kratzer wrote: Hi, On Tue, 19 Oct 2004, Marc G. Fournier wrote: Why would I be getting: # ifconfig fxp0 alias 200.46.204.9 ifconfig: ioctl (SIOCAIFADDR): File exists when I know for a fact that it hasn't been configured? you should use a netmask of 255.255.255.255 for ipv4 aliases. ifconfig fxp0 alias 200.46.204.9 netmask 255.255.255.255 Is that new? You are right, that fixed it, but didn't think I had to do that before :( Thanks ... Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664 ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
