[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Do you know the TCP stack? (127.x.x.x routing)

To: Eran Mann <emann@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Do you know the TCP stack? (127.x.x.x routing)
From: jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 07 Mar 2005 07:14:44 -0500
Cc: Zdenek Radouch <zdenek@xxxxxxx>, Thomas Graf <tgraf@xxxxxxx>, Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxx>, Martin Mares <mj@xxxxxx>, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-net@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <422C0B50.20500@xxxxxxx>
Organization: jamalopolous
References: <m1y8d0mss2.fsf@xxxxxx> <E1D7zBN-0004hX-00@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <E1D7lQN-0002gz-00@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <E1D7lQN-0002gz-00@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <E1D7zBN-0004hX-00@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050306173145.GQ31837@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <E1D81mg-0002rz-00@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <m1y8d0mss2.fsf@xxxxxx> <3sp35g$7hpm0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <422C0B50.20500@xxxxxxx>
Reply-to: hadi@xxxxxxxxxx
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
On Mon, 2005-03-07 at 03:05, Eran Mann wrote:
> Zdenek Radouch wrote:
> ...
> > 
> > 2) If it does require kernel hacking, would you like to do it for me?
> >     (as I had said, as a contract)
> I think what Andi Kleen was talking about below is something like the 
> attached 5 minutes patch (applies cleanly to 2.4.2x kernels I have at 
> hand, and to 2.6.11 with minor offset). Please donate the 5 minute wages 
> to the OSDL or the FSF at your choice ;-)

That should do it. Or you can even return false in the macro always for
his case - since he will never have a lo device.

However, using these addresses is a BAD BAD idea. A lot of other
machines will be expecting 127.x to mean something speacial. I dont
think you should ask the poster for wages, he will suffer enough with
ARPs etc ;-> 

What is so wrong with RFC198 addresses??


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>