Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!cbmvax!grr From: grr@cbmvax.commodore.com (George Robbins) Newsgroups: comp.unix.ultrix Subject: Re: SLIP problem on Ultrix 3.0 Message-ID: <10807@cbmvax.commodore.com> Date: 11 Apr 90 22:28:52 GMT References: <12124@s.ms.uky.edu> Reply-To: grr@cbmvax (George Robbins) Distribution: comp Organization: Commodore, West Chester, PA Lines: 22 In article <12124@s.ms.uky.edu> david@ms.uky.edu (David Herron -- One of the vertebrae) writes: > Yes that's the case. (That having multiple sl devices doesn't work). > > The code for if_sl.c appears to have compiled to only support 1 sl device. > Or rather, I don't know how it'd have >1 ... Weeerll ... it almost does. > > If it matters any ... all of my SLIP links are in net 223.163.130.0. > Perhaps this would work if the links were in different nets? Any action on this lately? In digging thru some other TCP related stuff, it appears that each link is supposed to be a different net/subnet unless the software has some provision for fudging up an anonymous net. I don't know to what extent you might be able to fake this out with something like a 2-bit subnet mask specified for that interface or other trickery. Having both "interfaces" on the same "net" might result in a lack of interest in routing packets to the right link since the system could conclude that they are both on the same net and therefore both see the same packets. -- George Robbins - now working for, uucp: {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!grr but no way officially representing: domain: grr@cbmvax.commodore.com Commodore, Engineering Department phone: 215-431-9349 (only by moonlite)