nanog mailing list archives
Re: IP4 address conservation method
From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike () swm pp se>
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2013 18:57:51 +0200 (CEST)
On Wed, 5 Jun 2013, William Herrin wrote:
Nothing. The problem is that the arp source IP doesn't fall within the interface netmask at the receiver. Some receivers ignore that... after all, why do they care what the source IP is? They only care about the source MAC. Other receivers see a spoofed packet and drop it.
Why wouldn't it be within the source IP mask? I would imagine local-proxy-arp would work exactly the same way as if a directly connected host with the IP the ARP request was for would have answered.
-- Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike () swm pp se
Current thread:
- IP4 address conservation method Mikael Abrahamsson (Jun 04)
- Re: IP4 address conservation method Dan White (Jun 05)
- Re: IP4 address conservation method Blake Hudson (Jun 06)
- Re: IP4 address conservation method Tore Anderson (Jun 06)
- Re: IP4 address conservation method Blake Hudson (Jun 06)
- Re: IP4 address conservation method William Herrin (Jun 05)
- Re: IP4 address conservation method Mikael Abrahamsson (Jun 05)
- Re: IP4 address conservation method William Herrin (Jun 05)
- Re: IP4 address conservation method Mikael Abrahamsson (Jun 05)
- Re: IP4 address conservation method Dan White (Jun 05)
- Re: IP4 address conservation method Mikael Abrahamsson (Jun 05)
- Re: IP4 address conservation method Dan White (Jun 05)
- Re: IP4 address conservation method Ricky Beam (Jun 05)
- Re: IP4 address conservation method William Herrin (Jun 05)
- Re: IP4 address conservation method Bjørn Mork (Jun 06)
- Re: IP4 address conservation method William Herrin (Jun 06)
- Re: IP4 address conservation method Jimmy Hess (Jun 06)
- Re: IP4 address conservation method William Herrin (Jun 06)
- Re: IP4 address conservation method Bjørn Mork (Jun 07)
- Re: IP4 address conservation method rdrake (Jun 05)
- Re: IP4 address conservation method Jimmy Hess (Jun 05)