Re: 2 nics, 1 network, puzzle?

[Dimitri Maziuk <dmaziuk@yola.bmrb.wisc.edu>]

* Shawn Yarbrough (shawn@nailstorm.com) spake thusly:
> > > What everybody seems to be telling me is that because IP is routable,
> > > ARP replies are also routable, and the kernel is free to mix and match
> > > IP addresses with Ethernet interfaces however it likes according to
> > > it's IP routing conventions.  I don't agree with this.
> > 
> > You don't agree that it's what's happening, or you don't agree that it
> > should be the way that the kernel operates?
> 
> The latter, as you guessed correctly.
> 
> I think the kernel is applying IP routing rules to ethernet ARP replies. 
> I don't think it should be doing this, because an ARP reply is clearly
> related to a physical ethernet address.  ARP has nothing to do with IP
> networks, only with ethernet networks and with a single IP address.
> 
> At least that's how I understand ARP.
> 
> Or is an ARP reply actually an IP packet?  Maybe it is, but I don't think
> so, I'm assuming it's an ethernet packet.

ARP is a part of TCP/IP suite, it's just that it's a network layer protocol 
(like IP & ICMP). ARP has a lot to do with IP networks, it provides mapping 
between *IP* address and MAC address.

ARP packet is an ARP packet.

> All I care about is that when ethernet address E1 is bound to IP address
> I1, everybody else on the network knows it.  The kernel is telling
> everybody else on the network that E0 = I1, which is wrong.

Then the kernel is b0rked. LKML is at vger.kernel.org (hint).

Dima
-- 
Backwards compatibility is either a pun or an oxymoron.                  -- PGN


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-request@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org