You are fantastic! Thank you again. :-)
feng
andrew morgan wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Jul 2000, Hong F Du wrote:
>
> > Yes, you are right. 0192:01 on eth1 and 1964:95 on eth0 are assigned to this
> > machine as router.
> >
> > According to my atalk.conf
> > eth0 -phase 2 -net 6500 -addr 6500.149 -zone "sci"....
> > and there is no any number as 0192 and 1964 in it.
> >
> > Why didn't I see any 6500 network number shows up on the /proc/net/atalk_route?
> >
> > Is there any relationship between 6500 in atalk.conf and 1964 on
> > /proc/net/atalk_route?
>
> The numbers in atalk_route are in hex. So 6500 decimal is 0x1964 (hex).
> 0x0192 (hex) is 402 decimal.
>
> So your -addr 6500.149 settings translates to 1964:95 in hex. Hex format
> is used in all those /proc/net files. Grab a good calculator or sharpen
> your pencil if you need to convert them very often... :)
>
> Andy
- Routing Table in netatalk? Hong F Du
- Re: Routing Table in netatalk? Crystal
- Re: Routing Table in netatalk? Hauke Fath
- Re: Routing Table in netatalk? andrew morgan
- Re: Routing Table in netatalk? Hong F Du
- Re: Routing Table in netatalk? andrew morgan
- Re: Routing Table in netatalk? Hong F Du
- Re: Routing Table in netatalk? andrew morgan
- Hong F Du