Re: Questions re pseudo-ports

From: John Ackermann (fonehuwl.hdkqvawmf@cpk.com)
Date: Thu Dec 07 2000 - 18:27:39 EET

  • Next message: Richard Adams: "Re: Questions re pseudo-ports"

    In message <terhi.victor@logonet.com>
    Tomi wrote:

    [ snip ]
    >So to make use of the dmascc0 port, you should create a axports entry with
    >any name and a unique callsign. Then set the hw address for the scc
    >interface to that callsign: ifconfig dmascc0 hw ax25 <callsign>

    Aha!!! It's that last piece -- using ifconfig to assign the callsign --
    that I hadn't thought of. Great idea, and I'll document it at my web
    site (I don't think I've seen this issue discussed before).
     
    [ snip ]
    >Using real interface names in axports is of course legal, but it can cause
    >much confusion. There is for example _no_ guarantee that a kissattached
    >interface be really called ax0 even if it says so in axports. All the ax25
    >utilities of course know it by that name but the real interface name (used
    >by ifconfig etc.) might be something else in the ax0...99999 range. That's
    >why I prefer to use axports names that don't resemble interface names at
    >all, to keep the separation clear.

    I wouldn't have voluntarily used "dmascc0" as the port name, but since
    I couldn't figure out a way to assign an axport to the device, that was all
    I could think of to try.

    73,
    John
    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-hams" in
    the body of a message to oytf.woeu@uni-regensburg.de



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Dec 07 2000 - 18:29:46 EET