[163323] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: IP4 address conservation method
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mikael Abrahamsson)
Wed Jun 5 12:11:49 2013
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2013 18:11:20 +0200 (CEST)
From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
To: William Herrin <bill@herrin.us>
In-Reply-To: <CAP-guGV_VihKzm1b6u29nkT0WL6=QE8=hLOKz4k1pg6UNbrK5g@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Wed, 5 Jun 2013, William Herrin wrote:
> Both the router and host have to support sending and accepting invalid
> ARP requests. Since the Linux kernel already mishandles arp by default,
> you're probably begging for unexpected behavior. Double down on that if
> the customer controls the server image.
Exactly what is wrong with the ARP answers and requests sent using
local-proxy-arp?
--
Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se
