* Tim Wright <timw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2006-12-01 14:27 > > [root@nfstest root]# strace -e ioctl ifconfig eth0:5 > > 10.12.0.22 netmask 255.255.0.0 up > > ioctl(4, 0x8916, 0xbfb15440) = 0 > > ioctl(4, 0x8913, 0xbfb15370) = 0 > > ioctl(4, 0x8914, 0xbfb15370) = 0 > > ioctl(4, 0x891c, 0xbfb15440) = 0 > > ioctl(4, 0x8913, 0xbfb15370) = 0 > > ioctl(4, 0x8914, 0xbfb15370) = 0 > > [root@nfstest root]# strace -e ioctl ifconfig eth0:6 > > 10.12.0.22 netmask 255.255.0.0 up > > ioctl(4, 0x8916, 0xbfc835b0) = 0 > > ioctl(4, 0x8913, 0xbfc834e0) = 0 > > ioctl(4, 0x8914, 0xbfc834e0) = 0 > > ioctl(4, 0x891c, 0xbfc835b0) = 0 > > ioctl(4, 0x8913, 0xbfc834e0) = 0 > > ioctl(4, 0x8914, 0xbfc834e0) = -1 EADDRNOTAVAIL (Cannot > > assign requested address) > > SIOCSIFFLAGS: Cannot assign requested address > > > > I am grabbing the ifconfig source to try to see exactly what > > they are doing. > > Very odd. > > That's SIOCSIFADDR, SIOCGIFFLAGS, SIOCSIFFLAGS followed by > SIOCSIFNETMASK, SIOCGIFFLAGS, SIOCSIFFLAGS. > Apparently, the set address succeeds, and things only blow up when it > attempts to set the interface flags for the second time. The preferred source address for local routes should always equal the local address of the interface address it is based on therefore the output you listed in a previous post seems indeed odd. I'm off for the weekend but I'll have a look at it when I get back on monday if you didn't manage to solve it by then. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
