ifconfig(8) syntax intuitiveness

Joerg Sonnenberger joerg at britannica.bec.de
Wed Aug 24 08:20:12 PDT 2005

On Wed, Aug 24, 2005 at 04:39:38PM +0200, Thomas E. Spanjaard wrote:
> Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> ~ > It's not that easy. This has nothing to do with the interface, but is a
> | restriction from the routing stack. Once that restriction goes away,
> | there's no reason why aliases wouldn't allow it too.
> That's true, this point isn't exactly an ifconfig issue. However, is
> there any objection against changing the behaviour of the routing stack
> to what NetBSD does in this specific case?

What does NetBSD do in such a situation?

> |>I second your thoughts about "delete". You don't delete it, you remove
> it.
> | You delete the route.
> Not if you remove an alias for a subnet already assigned to that
> interface, then you just remove the alias address, but the route stays
> (you still have an IP in that subnet assigned to that interface etc).

You still delete a route, the interface route for the alias address.


More information about the Users mailing list