-> BTW, please cc netdev or myself if you are addressing me. This email
-> just forwarde by someone else to me - I am not on linux-net. You seem
-> have trimmed down the CC list.
You should join the list and the quit when you are done. Otherwise,
like with this email I get multiple copies of it.
-> I read this a few times and still didnt get it:
-> Why is it that people using 1918 addresses are affecting you?
-> Does using 127.x help you because you assume _nobody_ else would be
-> 127.x addresses?
I am in a chassis. I need a way to do interface card communication.
Even if those cards are exposed to the outside world.
-> I am assuming you want this address for some internal network whereas
-> external contains some routable addresses?
-> > So I have this working in my products now. I had to do something a
-> > different in that I want a "special" 127.xx.xx.xx range to be sent
-> > on the wire. So here is what I did.
-> Seems you did too much. Look at the 2 liner patch posted by Eran Mann
Right. That works too. But what I did was about 10 lines of code. And
I refined it a bit better I believe. That way packets destined for "my"
internal network got out the appropriate interface. The rest go on
their merry way to the loopback world.