On Tue, May 06, 2003 at 12:07:32AM +0300, Julian Anastasov wrote: > On Mon, 5 May 2003, Ard van Breemen wrote: > > > Hi, > > Has anybody noticed that when: > > ip addr add 192.168.0.1/32 dev eth0 > > ip route add 192.168.0.2/32 dev eth0 > > It should respond after "ip route flush cache", Grrrr, thanks Julian. > you are missing something, I assume eth0 is not down. Correct. This was just the educational example... Pfff, I thought I was going insane.... I had a 2.4.18 kernel talking to a 2.4.20 kernel, except that the 2.4.20 kernel did not reply on the arps... Now to find something soft to bounce my head against (I already have the headache, so I don't want it to hurt extra...). Eh, just curious in how arp depends on routing... I've already seen how neigh/gc_thresh[123] can influence the reachability of a host, and that the routing cache can lock entries in the neigh table while they are being flushed, filling up the neigh table etc... -- mail up 171+00:12, 7 users, load 0.08, 0.20, 0.16 mistar1 up 29+18:16, 17 users, load 0.02, 0.04, 0.00 Let your government know you value your freedom: sign the petition: http://petition.eurolinux.org
