On Wed, Sep 13, 2006 at 04:59:18PM -0400, Thor Lancelot
Simon wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 13, 2006 at 07:50:46AM -0400, Greg Troxel
wrote:
> >
> > Probably lo(4) needs bridge support, and adding
that would be the
> > right thing really.
>
> I think this is a terrible idea. Why should we force
loopback to
> emulate an Ethernet device just so we can bridge it?
It is not an
> Ethernet device and we should not pretend that it is
one.
That's a point I can't argue.
It seems tap does the proper thing and my loopback idea was
wrong,
I never had really thought about the implications bridging
had.
florian
--
florian heigl http://deranfangvomen.de/
"ja, ja, ja, ja, ja, oh, oh, oh, oh scheise. oh. oh
fuck."
-- the sound of a leased line multiplexer failing for the
second time
just after things looked ok again (via a workmate at the
phone)
|