Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 24 Mar 1998 01:32:55 -0500 (EST) | From | Doug Crompton <> | Subject | The way Linux adds routes. |
| |
As a result of a discussion on another group I ask this question....
Why was Linux' route command written so strictly or explicitly? E.G. it seems that other OS's / routers allow something like:
route add 204.132.128.1/24
Which means route the 204.132.128 net with a gateway of the entire address.
Or written in Linux route command -
route add -net 204.132.128.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 gw 204.132.128.1
The former being a shorthand method of defining the entire address,netmask,gw in one string.
I am NOT arguing against the way it was done. Just wondering why it was designed that way.
Doug
**************************** * Doug Crompton * * Richboro, PA 18954 * * 215-355-5307 * * * * doug@crompton.com * * wa3dsp@wa3dsp.ampr.org * * http://www.crompton.com * ****************************
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
| |