[Top] [All Lists]

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

To: Zdenek Radouch <zdenek@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Do you know the TCP stack? (127.x.x.x routing)
From: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2005 21:19:25 +0100
Cc: Martin Mares <mj@xxxxxx>, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-net@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <E1D81mg-0002rz-00@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> (Zdenek Radouch's message of "Sun, 06 Mar 2005 14:48:31 -0500")
References: <E1D7zBN-0004hX-00@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <E1D7lQN-0002gz-00@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <E1D7lQN-0002gz-00@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <E1D7zBN-0004hX-00@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050306173145.GQ31837@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <E1D81mg-0002rz-00@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Gnus/5.110002 (No Gnus v0.2) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux)
Zdenek Radouch <zdenek@xxxxxxx> writes:

> OK, I think I am getting the picture.
> 1) looks like what I need may be possible, at least as far as
>     some kernels are concerned.  It's not clear that 2.4.25 will work.
> 2) I only have to perform close to magic in locating the "right"
>     tools that happen to work on a "right" kernel release.

iproute2 has been the tool of choice since Linux 2.2.

ifconfig/route and the old ioctl interface have been only
there for compatibility and show only a small subset of 
the full functionality.

That has been true for many many years.

> 3) Clearly the route processing is in flux, at least within the
>     releases I am dealing with, so I need to be careful interpreting
>     what I see, and I should avoid making any inferences.

I don't think that's true. Routing hasn't changed much for a long time.

> There is no doubt that the 127.x net is treated in a special
> way.  If I have to believe what I just learned, then the 127

It is. 127.* is hardcoded in the routing engine and e.g.
it won't accept outside packets with a loopback address.

Most likely it's enough to change the "LOOPBACK" macro to allow
parts of the Class A to be used for other purposes.


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