Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*why\s+autoconfiguration\s+work\'s\s+while\s+shouldn\'t\s+\?\s+\:\)\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*why\s+autoconfiguration\s+work\'s\s+while\s+shouldn\'t\s+\?\s+\:\)\s*$/: 8 ]

Total 8 documents matching your query.

1. g in tcp_ipv6.c (score: 1): Author: <yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 17:55:23 +0100; I have small problem with linux kernels up to 2.4.1-pre1 (didn't tested never versions). My rc-scripts setup such routes: [root@arm conf]# /etc/rc.d/init.d/network start > /dev/null [root@arm conf]#; /archives/netdev/2001-02/msg00179.html (9,984 bytes)
2. shouldn't ? :) (score: 1): Author: iskiewicz <misiek@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 02:10:57 +0900; This is not a bug. If there're no routers, we must assume all destination are on-link. (RFC2461 5.2) -- Hideaki YOSHIFUJI @ USAGI Project <yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> PGP5i FP: F731 6599 5EB2 BBA7 1515; /archives/netdev/2001-02/msg00180.html (9,017 bytes)
3. shouldn't ? :) (score: 1): Author: 棨鑻辨槑 <yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 18:27:32 +0100; On/Dnia Fri, Feb 23, 2001 at 02:10:57AM +0900, YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / ?$B5HF#1QL@?(B wrote/napisa艂(a) Ah! :) And what about my second problem... it sends one RS even when conf/all/autoconf is 0 ? (18:23; /archives/netdev/2001-02/msg00181.html (9,624 bytes)
4. shouldn't ? :) (score: 1): Author: adiusz Miskiewicz <misiek@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 18:58:41 +0100; /archives/netdev/2001-02/msg00182.html (11,039 bytes)
5. why autoconfiguration work's while shouldn't ? :) (score: 1): Author: Arkadiusz Miskiewicz <misiek@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 17:55:23 +0100; I have small problem with linux kernels up to 2.4.1-pre1 (didn't tested never versions). My rc-scripts setup such routes: [root@arm conf]# /etc/rc.d/init.d/network start > /dev/null [root@arm conf]#; /archives/netdev/2001-02/msg00421.html (9,999 bytes)
6. Re: why autoconfiguration work's while shouldn't ? :) (score: 1): Author: YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / <yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 02:10:57 +0900; This is not a bug. If there're no routers, we must assume all destination are on-link. (RFC2461 5.2) -- Hideaki YOSHIFUJI @ USAGI Project <yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> PGP5i FP: F731 6599 5EB2 BBA7 1515; /archives/netdev/2001-02/msg00422.html (9,075 bytes)
7. Re: why autoconfiguration work's while shouldn't ? :) (score: 1): Author: Arkadiusz Miskiewicz <misiek@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 18:27:32 +0100; On/Dnia Fri, Feb 23, 2001 at 02:10:57AM +0900, YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / ?$B5HF#1QL@?(B wrote/napisa(a) Ah! :) And what about my second problem... it sends one RS even when conf/all/autoconf is 0 ? (18:23:; /archives/netdev/2001-02/msg00423.html (9,776 bytes)
8. Re: why autoconfiguration work's while shouldn't ? :) (score: 1): Author: Jan Rekorajski <baggins@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 18:58:41 +0100; As far as I remember the RFC and my discussion about this topic with ANK, there is no MUST. We should or may add this default route, but also we may give the ability to turn this behaviour off. Some; /archives/netdev/2001-02/msg00424.html (11,176 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 8
Page: [1]