Around Mon,Jun 09 2003, at 07:59, MKlinke, wrote: > On Monday 09 June 2003 18:28, Roger wrote: > > Around Mon,Jun 09 2003, at 10:06, Nick White, wrote: > > > In RedHat 9 the 169.254.0.0/16 gets added to the routing table on > > > boot. Probably to play nicely with windows boxen. In Windows > > > 2000+, if there is no DHCP server available, an APIPA address > > > (169.254.x.x) is assigned. > > > > Not just windows uses the 169.254.x.x I've seen Macs use it as well > > as Windows. RFC-3330 defines the net block for use. > > Does Redhat 9 always set the routing table for that block, or does it > > get set when the DHCP server is slow to respond. > > It appears that RH9 will add that route regardless of > DHCP/STATIC/GOOD/BAD interface unless each and every > /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-* has the 'NOZEROCONF=yes' > parameter. Odd, considering it's usual function of providing a IP > address/route in case a valid one doesn't exist, but there it is. Mind > you, I haven't read rfc-3330 mentioned above and it may actually advise > this behavior but it's certainly different that has been used, > admittedly by Microsoft, for the past 5 or so years. I think this is > why everyone is scratching their heads trying to figure out why that > route is there when there isn't any other "problem" with the > interfaces. > RFC-3330 just has this to say about that block: 169.254.0.0/16 - This is the "link local" block. It is allocated for communication between hosts on a single link. Hosts obtain these addresses by auto-configuration, such as when a DHCP server may not be found.
I'm no RFC expert, so there could be others lurking out there to tell when specifically to use 169.254.x.x -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] >From /usr/bin/fortune: PENGUINICITY!! -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
