On Sun, Feb 13, 2005 at 07:49:05PM +0200, Alin-Adrian Anton wrote: <snip> > I really don't see why you use A-class netmask. It's very probable that > a C-class netmask would suffice:
They already are using a /24 (class C) network. Take another look at the mask - 0xffffff00. In any case, the network 'class' in use is not important. > rl1 inet 10.0.0.1 netmask 0xffffff00 broadcast 10.0.0.255 > > Also, the routes for rl1 which is the internal interface don't look normal. > > You should have only one rl1 entry, like this: > > 10.0.0.0 link#2 UC 0 0 rl1 > > And not: > >10 link#2 UC 2 0 rl1 > >10.0.0.3 00:0d:61:17:fc:30 UHLW 1 444 rl1 903 > >10.255.255.255 ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff UHLWb 0 2453 rl1 > > See? Why special route for 10.0.0.3? No, those routes are normal. They were all added to the routing table by FreeBSD. On the second line, the 903 is an expiration time for the route. I'm not sure why FreeBSD adds these temporary entries (too avoid having to do an ARP lookup?), but they are documented in the handbook. The 1st line is just a route for the subnet on the rl1 interface. The final is just another route for what is presumable the broadcast address for the rl1 network. Nathan
pgpiZWZPAflPM.pgp
Description: PGP signature
