[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200904221515.05459.inaky@linux.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 15:15:05 -0700
From: Inaky Perez-Gonzalez <inaky@...ux.intel.com>
To: Mark Smith <ipng@...06e6720323030352d30312d31340a.nosense.org>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: What makes a good fake MAC address?
On Wednesday 22 April 2009, Mark Smith wrote:
> Hi Inaky,
>
> (please CC me, I'm not on the list)
>
> "The problem with using a zero mac address is that it confuses the
> bridging software (and maybe others). I was wondering, what would be a
> fake mac address we could put in there that is legal for this kind of
> "faking"? [or the closest thing to legal?]"
>
> Since you're from an organisation with an OUI allocation or two, I
> think a real Intel one would be best. It then wouldn't be fake, and no
> matter where it was exposed (host only, local network, or globally
> e.g. in IPv6 node addresses), it would be guaranteed not to collide
> with any other addresses (unless Intel make error an error in their own
> OUI administration.)
It doesn't really work, because it is for the "from" end of the connection; as
said somewhere else in the thread, the WiMAX link is P2P, IP only. The card
has a local address, that we use for the "to" field, but for the from, we
need to fake an address from the network -- which is not necessarily an intel
device :)
So maybe local addresses would not be the right choice, and clearly Intel
assigned ones neither :)
Thanks,
--
Inaky
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists