| To: | Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Do you know the TCP stack? (127.x.x.x routing) |
| From: | Thomas Graf <tgraf@xxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Sun, 6 Mar 2005 21:45:16 +0100 |
| Cc: | Zdenek Radouch <zdenek@xxxxxxx>, Martin Mares <mj@xxxxxx>, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-net@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <m1y8d0mss2.fsf@xxxxxx> |
| References: | <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> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
* Andi Kleen <m1y8d0mss2.fsf@xxxxxx> 2005-03-06 21:19 > Zdenek Radouch <zdenek@xxxxxxx> writes: > > > > 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. Yes, it will work around the martian route and arp checks but will probably break quite a few usersapce applications. |
| Previous by Date: | Re: Do you know the TCP stack? (127.x.x.x routing), alex |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: ixgb problem, Baruch Even |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Do you know the TCP stack? (127.x.x.x routing), Andi Kleen |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Do you know the TCP stack? (127.x.x.x routing), Andi Kleen |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |