On 11/06/2013 03:00 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Wed, 06.11.13 14:14, Mantas Mikulėnas (graw...@gmail.com) wrote:
On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 1:32 PM, Lennart Poettering
<lenn...@poettering.net> wrote:
I have my suspicions that that won't work out since there already are
quite a few properties for addresses, no? There's scope, flags,
label. For Point-To-Point stuff the address needs to be paired with a
local one, and in other cases with a broadcast address. We should at
least try to normalize this into different sections, no?
Hmm, when is explicitly setting the broadcast address ever necessary?
There are some cases like that in hosting setups where people play games
with this so that they can use tiny subnets while packing hosts as close
as they can wihouting losing one (or two) adresses in each subnet for
broadcast (and as network address)...
Interesting first time I hear of this and I assume these "games" became
unnecessary with ipv6 thus no need to keep Broadcast around no?
JBG
_______________________________________________
systemd-devel mailing list
systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
