[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200907011242.12812.denys@visp.net.lb>
Date: Wed, 1 Jul 2009 12:42:12 +0300
From: Denys Fedoryschenko <denys@...p.net.lb>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [RFC] arp announce, arp_proxy and windows ip conflict verification
On Wednesday 01 July 2009 09:58:36 Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>
> What problem were you originally trying to solve?
>
> Having a proxy arp gateway reply to addresses it routes is proper
> behaviour.
It is not correct behavior to reply to gratuitous ARP, if you dont have this
IP locally!
IP conflict detection will fail then completely, if proxy arp machine have
default route (means answer to ALL ARP requests).
Sadly RFC 1027 (Proxy ARP) dated in 1987 and not explaining this case well.
I found other source of information, it is not reliable (wikipedia), but it is
also mentioned in one of HP patents
(http://www.freepatentsonline.com/y2009/0073990.html). My point of view
marked as (!!!!!!!).
ARP announcements
An ARP announcement (also known as Gratuitous ARP) is a packet containing
valid sender hardware and protocol addresses (SHA and SPA) for the host that
sent it, with identical destination and source addresses (TPA = SPA). Such a
request (!!!!!!!) is not intended to solicit a reply, but merely updates the
ARP caches of other hosts that receive the packet. Gratuitous ARP is usually
an ARP request [3], but it may also be an ARP reply [4].
--
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