> Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino wrote:
> 
> > 	does it address your problem?
> 
> To be honest: I don't know, or more like: I don't know if it treats the 
> issue completely. From my limited ability to read code I suppose it 
> adjusts the netmask upon receiving the addresses from the peer? I 

	yes, it is what the patch is doing.

> thought it would be good to fix the man pages to include the proper mask 
> in the examples, since point-to-point links generally should have a mask 
> of 0xffffffff, right? Maybe both places (driver and man pages) should 
> get a look. I really can't comment on the code.

	people do configure /30 netmask on point-to-point interface.  therefore
	i'm not certain if we can/should configure 0xffffffff netmask in
	if_spppsubr.c.

	anyways, i have dropped a note to the author of postfix on this issue.

itojun