Joakim Tjernlund writes: > James Carlson <carlsonj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote on 04/02/2009 18:14:44: > > > Sorry for the late reply, I got busy and forgot .. > > > Joakim Tjernlund writes: > > > I wonder how IFF_RUNNING is managed in recent pppd version(s). I very > much > > > like to > > > use IFF_RUNNING to see if the link working in both ends. > > > > For most implementations, IFF_RUNNING cannot be controlled by anything > > in user space (such as pppd). Instead, it's set/cleared by the > > kernel's PPP driver. > > I haven't looked into how ppp is impl. in user/kernel space but I suspect > that user space would have to help/inform the kernel ppp driver about > RUNNING status. The way it works today is that the daemon tears down the interface if it detects that the interface has failed. > > Defining "working" is difficult. Usually, the IFF_RUNNING flag is set > > if the link is either a demand link waiting for activity or if there's > > an active serial link underneath the connection, and IFF_UP is set > > when IPCP successfully negotiates addresses. > > Perhaps, but one could flip RUNNING if echo replies stops or if > someone pulls the cable. That would be a start The interface itself is torn down if you set the "lcp-echo-failure" and "lcp-echo-interval" options. I don't think that's a problem with the current code. If you do see a problem here, then I think it'd be helpful to have the problem itself described in some detail, rather than focussing on what solution you'd like to see implemented. -- James Carlson 42.703N 71.076W <carlsonj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ppp" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
