On 05/04/2013 02:56 PM, Gene Czarcinski wrote:
maybe I found a bug
Then again, maybe my old "reverse midas touch" is at it again and I have
found yet another bug ... that is, undesirable feature. Everything I
have found so far says that ::/0 is the same as specifying "default" for
IPv6 and tha
On 04/29/2013 11:55 AM, Laine Stump wrote:
(I wanted a separate message to comment on this part...)
On 04/26/2013 07:22 PM, Gene Czarcinski wrote:
+/* add an IP (static) route to a bridge */
+static int
+networkAddRouteToBridge(virNetworkObjPtr network,
+virNetworkRouteD
(I wanted a separate message to comment on this part...)
On 04/26/2013 07:22 PM, Gene Czarcinski wrote:
> +/* add an IP (static) route to a bridge */
> +static int
> +networkAddRouteToBridge(virNetworkObjPtr network,
> +virNetworkRouteDefPtr routedef)
> +{
> +bool done
On 04/26/2013 07:22 PM, Gene Czarcinski wrote:
> network: static route support for
>
> This patch adds the subelement of to define a static
> route. the address and prefix (or netmask) attribute identify the
> destination network, and the gateway attribute specifies the next hop
> address (whic
network: static route support for
This patch adds the subelement of to define a static
route. the address and prefix (or netmask) attribute identify the
destination network, and the gateway attribute specifies the next hop
address (which must be directly reachable from the containing
) which i
