>>>>> On Fri, 29 Jun 2001 09:28:54 -0700
>>>>> "Kevin Oberman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
oberman> I think the basic idea in the RFC may be reasonable. It only breaks
oberman> when the link selected is loopback. Had the stack tried to connect to
oberman> a physical link, this would have worked as intended, but loopback will
oberman> always be the wrong answer if it is the link used.
I agree with the basic idea of this RFC. I tested it on my box. When
default interface is set to actuall network interface, it takes a
while to falldown to use IPv4. Is it reasonable for you?
oberman> This is certainly reasonable, too. But the step of not allowing the lo
oberman> interface to qualify as the link for the default route seems like
oberman> something that should be done as well.
oberman> Of course, there may be some reason to want default to point at lo,
oberman> but I can't think of a good one.
Selecting lo0 is a problem in rc.network6. Since you are using a
laptop, there is no suitable network interface at boot. Then,
rc.network6 choose lo0 wrongly as default interface. It may better to
avoid choosing lo0 in rc.network6. I'll commit it. But, it is
workaround after all.
--
Hajimu UMEMOTO @ Internet Mutual Aid Society Yokohama, Japan
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] ume@{,jp.}FreeBSD.org
http://www.imasy.org/~ume/
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
