Darn, I have to correct myself once again.
Oleg Cherevko wrote:
Li, Qing wrote:
First of all, are you encountering any issues ?
Well, for the last 14+ years I used to setup aliases with 0x
netmask and everything worked OK. However recently I encountered
situation where 0x-st
Li, Qing wrote:
First of all, are you encountering any issues ?
Well, for the last 14+ years I used to setup aliases with 0x netmask and
everything worked OK. However recently I encountered situation where
0x-style alias triggered some unwanted network behavior.
When one set
First of all, are you encountering any issues ?
There is an outstanding issue with the address alias and improper routing
table update that I am actively working on.
--Qing
> -Original Message-
> From: owner-freebsd-...@freebsd.org [mailto:owner-freebsd-
> n...@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of
On 29.06.2011 18:10, Oleg Cherevko wrote:
Are there any drawbacks in setting aliases like this:
ifconfig em0 inet 192.168.1.1 netmask 0xff00
ifconfig em0 inet 192.168.1.2 netmask 0xff00
instead of traditional:
ifconfig em0 inet 192.168.1.1 netmask 0xff00
