[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130315151528.GA10503@order.stressinduktion.org>
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2013 16:15:28 +0100
From: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>
To: Thomas Martitz <thomas.martitz@....fraunhofer.de>
Cc: richard -rw- weinberger <richard.weinberger@...il.com>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"edumazet@...gle.com" <edumazet@...gle.com>,
"herbert@...dor.apana.org.au" <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Subject: Re: Trying to implement secondary loopback
On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 04:07:32PM +0100, Thomas Martitz wrote:
> Same result. I assumed the kernel treats lo in a special way for
> localhost-connections and that it would be impossible to achieve the
> same with a custom interface.
>
> I did the following:
>
> ifconfig lo down
> insmod ./mykmod.ko
> ifconfig eth2 up
> ifconfig eth2 127.0.0.1
>
> At this point ifconfig prints the same information for eth2 that it had
> printed for lo before (except for the LOOPBACK flag, but I can enable
> that one as well by adding IFF_LOOPBACK to the interface flags in the
> module). Yet my test application only works with lo, not eth2.
127.0.0.0/8 is guarded by the kernel, but there is a sysctl for relaxing the
checks, /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/route_localnet. You could give it a try.
--
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