| To: | "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: primary and secondary ip addresses |
| From: | Henrik Nordstrom <hno@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Fri, 17 Dec 2004 20:48:54 +0100 (CET) |
| Cc: | Andrea G Forte <andreaf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, hasso@xxxxxxxxx, laforge@xxxxxxxxxxxx, nhorman@xxxxxxxxxx, linux-net@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20041217112025.27688eb6.davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <41912F7A.6000408@xxxxxxxxxx> <200412161153.51251.hasso@xxxxxxxxx> <Pine.LNX.4.61.0412161103320.30452@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <200412161302.42357.hasso@xxxxxxxxx> <41C2F6E5.5010607@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <Pine.LNX.4.61.0412171621200.15793@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <41C30212.6000906@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20041217112025.27688eb6.davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Fri, 17 Dec 2004, David S. Miller wrote: By definition, a secondary IP address on an interface is not to be used as a source. But you can, but adding a route with such address as source or applications excplicitly binding to this source address. And it is highly useful to be able to use different source addresses in the same subnet for different purposes. It is the whole reason for the distinction between primary and secondary IP addresses, and it is why all secondaries are deleted once the primary is removed (because there are no valid source addresses to choose from any longer, therefore IP valid communications are no longer possible). Which is a false assumption in very many situations. Regards Henrik |
| Previous by Date: | Re: [Coverity] Untrusted user data in kernel, David S. Miller |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | [BK netdev-2.6] Update Typhoon firmware, David Dillow |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: primary and secondary ip addresses, David S. Miller |
| Next by Thread: | Re: primary and secondary ip addresses, jamal |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |