netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: neighbour cache vs. invalid addresses

To: kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: neighbour cache vs. invalid addresses
From: Werner Almesberger <almesber@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2000 20:29:13 +0200 (MET DST)
Cc: netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <200004291812.WAA06930@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> from "kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" at Apr 29, 2000 10:12:25 PM
Sender: owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> They are right. These flags do not mean, that such packets are
> indeliverable. It is pure advise, and applications taking them
> seriously are buggy as rule.

Not nice for NBMA ... :-(

> Actually, even CLIP could have some "broadcast router" on subnet without
> any modifications to protocol.

If it has some means to read the ATMARP server's table, yes. Normal
ATMARP (RFC1577) doesn't let it do this.

> But taking into account bug, described above, you simply have no choice
> but to follow your preferred way. 8)8)

The oracle has spoken ;-) My preferred way is of course to do as I do
now, i.e. to return the error as early as possible. But you seem to
suggest that I change my preference ? :)

Cheers, Werner

-- 
  _________________________________________________________________________
 / Werner Almesberger, ICA, EPFL, CH       werner.almesberger@xxxxxxxxxxx /
/_IN_N_032__Tel_+41_21_693_6621__Fax_+41_21_693_6610_____________________/

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