I am not sure I understand what you are saying. The change that was made was to the name for the host in /etc/hosts. The name "loopback" should always have been to a 127.* address, and all the 127.* addresses should be routed to the loopback interface.
-----Original Message----- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Alan Altmark Sent: Sunday, September 14, 2008 8:18 PM To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: 127.0.0.2 in /etc/hosts? On Sunday, 09/14/2008 at 05:36 EDT, Patrick Spinler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Uhm, I'm coming to this discussion late, but aren't all 127.0.0.0/8 > addresses defined to be loopback? Yes, I mentioned that in an early post on the subject. That's one of the reasons it makes no sense. But we still don't know precisely *why* the change was made, so the results of the discussion remain inconclusive. Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 __________________________________________________________________________________________________ CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email from the State of California is for the sole use of the intended recipient and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review or use, including disclosure or distribution, is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and destroy all copies of this email. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
