netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [2.4 PATCH] bugfix: ARP respond on all devices

To: Lars Marowsky-Bree <lmb@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [2.4 PATCH] bugfix: ARP respond on all devices
From: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2003 10:36:13 -0700
Cc: bloemsaa@xxxxxxxxx, richard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, skraw@xxxxxxxxxx, willy@xxxxxxxxx, alan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, carlosev@xxxxxxxxxxxx, lamont@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, davidsen@xxxxxxx, marcelo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-net@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, layes@xxxxxxxxx, torvalds@xxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20030819173920.GA3301@marowsky-bree.de>
References: <353568DCBAE06148B70767C1B1A93E625EAB57@post.pc.aspectgroup.co.uk> <070c01c36653$7f3c1ab0$c801a8c0@llewella> <20030819083438.26c985b9.davem@redhat.com> <20030819173920.GA3301@marowsky-bree.de>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
On Tue, 19 Aug 2003 19:39:20 +0200
Lars Marowsky-Bree <lmb@xxxxxxx> wrote:

> On 2003-08-19T08:34:38,
>    "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx> said:
> 
> > There are two valid ways the RFCs allow systems to handle
> > IP addresses.
> > 
> > 1) IP addresses are owned by "the host"
> > 2) IP addresses are owned by "the interface"
> > 
> > Linux does #1, many systems do #2, both are correct.
> 
> Yes, both are "correct" in the sense that the RFC allows this
> interpretation. The _sensible_ interpretation for practical networking
> however is #2, and the only persons who seem to believe differently are
> those in charge of the Linux network code...

And, as Alan said, we provide a way for one to obtain your networking
religion of week.

Changing the default is not an option, that would undoubtedly
break things.

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