[linux-help] Re: Routing sanity-check
[Top] [All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
On Tue, 25 Apr 2000, Jonathan Hall wrote:
> Well, it looks fine. Altho if you're using a 2.2.x or newer kernel, all of
> the 'route add' commands you have (with the exception of the default route)
> are unecessary, as the kernel adds those routes when you run the ifconfig
> command.
I'm still on 2.0.36. I'll eventually upgrade, but I've never found the
time. But I want it so I can run the newer firewall.
> So... is it working? That's the REAL test :-)
It *seems* to be. Which is why I like to have someone double-check my
setup. But it sure is fast. And cheap compared to my dedicated modem or
ISDN.
--
Carl D Cravens (raven@xxxxxxxxxxx)
Windows isn't crippleware: it's Functionally Challenged.
-- This is the linux-help@xxxxxxxxx list. To unsubscribe,
visit http://tmp2.complete.org/cgi-bin/listargate-aclug.cgi
- [linux-help] Routing sanity-check, Carl D Cravens, 2000/04/25
- [linux-help] Re: Routing sanity-check, Jonathan Hall, 2000/04/25
- [linux-help] Re: Routing sanity-check,
Carl D Cravens <=
- [linux-help] Re: Routing sanity-check, j m wagle, 2000/04/26
- [linux-help] Re: Routing sanity-check, Carl D Cravens, 2000/04/26
- [linux-help] Re: Routing sanity-check, j m wagle, 2000/04/26
- [linux-help] Re: Routing sanity-check, Clint A. Brubakken, 2000/04/27
- [linux-help] Re: Routing sanity-check, Jonathan Hall, 2000/04/27
- [linux-help] Re: Routing sanity-check, Clint A. Brubakken, 2000/04/27
- [linux-help] Re: Routing sanity-check, Jonathan Hall, 2000/04/27
- [linux-help] Re: Routing sanity-check, Steven Saner, 2000/04/27
- [linux-help] Re: Routing sanity-check, Clint A. Brubakken, 2000/04/27
- [linux-help] Re: Routing sanity-check, The Bobster, 2000/04/28
|
|