On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 10:26:18PM +0200, Sven-Haegar Koch wrote: > > #!/bin/sh > > ifconfig $INTERFACE 10.96.x.y > > Won't a netmask of 255.255.255.255 be better than not specifying any? > Otherwise it falls back to old classful adressing and would assume > 10.0.0.0/8 - which is clearly always wrong. [...] Or are tun devices > different in this regard?
Hm, it seems that ifconfig indeed treats tun and tap differently, if you
don't specify a netmask it applies a /32 for tun interfaces and a /8 for
tap.
Iproute is better I guess:
#!/bin/sh
ip addr add 10.96.x.y dev $INTERFACE
ip link set dev $INTERFACE up
> > Then, assuming you run tinc in router Mode (the default), you should
> > create a script named "subnet-up" in the same directory as tinc-up, and
> > put this in it:
> >
> > #!/bin/sh
> > ip addr add $SUBNET dev $INTERFACE
> >
> > And a "subnet-down" script:
> >
> > #!/bin/sh
> > ip addr del $SUBNET dev $INTERFACE
>
> Don't you mean "ip route add/del" here?
Yes, thanks for correcting me.
--
Met vriendelijke groet / with kind regards,
Guus Sliepen <[email protected]>
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ tinc mailing list [email protected] http://www.tinc-vpn.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tinc
