As Brian Somers wrote: > The code now avoids adding a host route if the interface address is > 0.0.0.0, and always treats a failure to add a host route as fatal > (previously, it masked EEXIST for some reason - I guessed because it > was trying to handle address re-assignment, but that works ok with > this patch).
I think that will be fatal for the sppp case with dynamic IP address negotiation. We use 0.0.0.0 as the local IP address for the unnegotiated PPP link then, with the idea that it's still possible to route through the interface anyway. For dial-on-demand PPP links (like on ISDN), the routed packets will then trigger the dialout event. In the course of the PPP negotiations, an actual local IP address will be negotiated and assigned, but we first need some packets to pass through the PPP layer in order to trigger this. Perhaps it would still be possible to use per-interface routes even after your change (-iface isp0 etc.), but currently, a number of documents describe that it's possible to use local address 0.0.0.0 and still get normal routing behaviour for those links. -- cheers, J"org .-.-. --... ...-- -.. . DL8DTL http://www.sax.de/~joerg/ NIC: JW11-RIPE Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-) To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
