Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 5 Sep 2002 11:05:19 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 5 Sep 2002 11:05:19 -0400 Received: from thumper2.emsphone.com ([199.67.51.102]:55174 "EHLO thumper2.emsphone.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 5 Sep 2002 11:05:17 -0400 Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2002 10:09:50 -0500 From: Andrew Ryan To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: ARP and alias IPs Message-ID: <20020905150949.GA8112@thumper2.emsphone.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 838 Lines: 21 The linux implementation of ARP is causing me problems. Linux sends out an ARP request with the default interface as the sender address, rather than then interface the request came on. For example eth0 10.1.1.100 eth0:1 192.16.1.101 and an ARP is received on 192.16.1.101, linux responds with 10.1.1.100 as the source address in the ARP request, rather than 192.16.1.101 (which FreeBSD, Solaris, and tru64 do). To me, this is just plain wrong. The sender address should be an address on the subnet that the request came from, not a different one. Is there any way to fix this? Andy - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/