Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 5 Sep 2002 12:01:11 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 5 Sep 2002 12:01:10 -0400 Received: from mta.sara.nl ([145.100.16.144]:14985 "EHLO mta.sara.nl") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 5 Sep 2002 12:01:08 -0400 Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2002 18:05:32 +0200 Subject: Re: ARP and alias IPs Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v482) From: Remco Post To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <20020905153436.GG16092@riesen-pc.gr05.synopsys.com> Message-Id: <4DE63E30-C0E9-11D6-8864-000393911DE2@sara.nl> X-Pgp-Agent: GPGMail 0.5.3 (v20) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.482) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2392 Lines: 70 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On donderdag, september 5, 2002, at 05:34 , Alex Riesen wrote: > On Thu, Sep 05, 2002 at 10:09:50AM -0500, Andrew Ryan wrote: >> 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. > > http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/std/std37.txt > >> For example >> >> eth0 10.1.1.100 >> eth0:1 192.16.1.101 > > Are you really expect an aliased interface to work the way you > described? if I read this version of the internet standard correctly, it should respond with the ip address that was requested: "It then notices that it is a request, so it swaps fields, putting EA(Y) in the new sender Ethernet address field (ar$sha), sets the opcode to reply, and sends the packet directly (not broadcast) to EA(X)." Meaning that the reply must come from the ip-address that was beeing looked for in the first place, not just any address used on that interface. Though at the time of writing this was not something that was in use at all I guess. So yes, I think it is reasonable to assume that if I do an arp request for one address, I do not get a reply for another address that happens to be on the same interface... There is no way of determining that this is indeed the address I was looking for in the first place. I have not checked to see if Linux does this, but if it does it is plain wrong... - --- Met vriendelijke groeten, Remco Post SARA - Stichting Academisch Rekencentrum Amsterdam http://www.sara.nl High Performance Computing Tel. +31 20 592 8008 Fax. +31 20 668 3167 PGP keys at http://home.sara.nl/~remco/keys.asc "I really didn't foresee the Internet. But then, neither did the computer industry. Not that that tells us very much of course - the computer industry didn't even foresee that the century was going to end." -- Douglas Adams -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (Darwin) iD8DBQE9d4DTBIoCv9yTlOwRAm1zAJ9DyuMA3RlAFYZeJkulWYOFPPrFZwCdGIHx pIvaA6utByxRaHKq58JdTso= =jsvP -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- - 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/