Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*neighbour\s+cache\s+vs\.\s+invalid\s+addresses\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*neighbour\s+cache\s+vs\.\s+invalid\s+addresses\s*$/: 22 ]

Total 22 documents matching your query.

21. Re: neighbour cache vs. invalid addresses (score: 1): Author: "James R. Leu" <jleu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2000 20:59:18 -0500; So why doesn't ATM for Linux support this then (or does it and I'm just clueless?) All I want to do is have one PVC between two boxes, and send packets addressed to the multicast all routers address.; /archives/netdev/2000-04/msg00227.html (10,219 bytes)
22. Re: neighbour cache vs. invalid addresses (score: 1): Author: kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2000 20:37:37 +0400 (MSK DST); Hello! It is reasonable in the highest extent. Until now it resulted only in more troubles. F.e. multicasts were used mainly by routing control apps, which were supposed to start in void state on bar; /archives/netdev/2000-04/msg00233.html (9,578 bytes)

Current List: 21 - 22
Page: [1] [2]