From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Tue, 27 Jul 1999 12:32:39 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199907271932.MAA28492@saul4.u.washington.edu> From: a sun To: jhart@abacus.bates.edu CC: MBoie@Adobe.COM, rspell@bates.edu, linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org, netatalk-admins@umich.edu In-reply-to: <199907271901.PAA22932@abacus.bates.edu> (jhart@abacus.bates.edu) Subject: Re: Netatalk bug?, too many routes/iface References: <199907271901.PAA22932@abacus.bates.edu> Sender: owner-linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org List-Id: I presume, then, that this is a bug in the Appletalk code in LinuxPPC, even though it's numbered 0.18, as compared to 0.17 in the Redhat 5.2 we're running on our Intel machines. The Intel machines have no problem with our network numbering ranges, which, according to our network administrator, can legally go from 1 to 65535. i think that it might have been an endianness bug, but i'm not sure. if it still happens with linux-2.2.10, let me know, and i'll look into it. oh yeah, your administrator is wrong about the range of possible network numbers. numbers from 65280 to 65534 are reserved for routerless networks. -a [[ This message was sent via the linuxppc-dev mailing list. Replies are ]] [[ not forced back to the list, so be sure to Cc linuxppc-dev if your ]] [[ reply is of general interest. Please check http://lists.linuxppc.org/ ]] [[ and http://www.linuxppc.org/ for useful information before posting. ]]