Re: PM3 stopping?

Stephen Fisher (lithium@cia-g.com)
Wed, 9 Jul 1997 07:02:28 -0600 (MDT)

I agree that they should add a null interface. I believe I've mentioned
it before but it takes forever to convince Livingston to do anything.

On Tue, 8 Jul 1997, Tom Samplonius wrote:

> On Tue, 8 Jul 1997, Jon Lewis wrote:
>
> > As long as I'm off topic, here's an RFE for PM's. They don't support
> > reject routes yet, do they? While installing gated on my linux boxes, I
>
> I would like to see a null interface that you could give an address,
> and then add low-priority/high-cost routes. Kinda like:
>
> set null0 address 10.1.1.1
> add route 198.53.215.0/24 10.1.1.1 15
>
> It should be easy to add a null interface, just like an ether0, or w1
> that doesn't do anything. This solution is also generic, and can be
> used to build lots of useful setups.
>
> > No more routing loops or bunches of ICMP redirects for unused dialup IPs.
>
> Well, Livingston is working a specialized version of this for dynamic
> address pools. Unfortunately, it will not have the flexibility of the
> null interface idea.