Hi! On Thu, 9 Aug 2001, Andi Kleen wrote: > arp_filter checks the source address, and the route for that source > address is on eth0, so it is perfectly correct. So arp_filter just checks if someone is allowed to ask for an address by looking if there is a route to the solicitor through this particular interface. If this is the intended behaviour then please point me in the direction where I can find a solution to my problem: the solicitor is the right one to ask for an IP, but the machine should not answer a request for an address with scope link that is not bound to the interface where the request arrived. > You need to change your routing so that the 129.187.154.153 route goes > through eth1 or alternatively add blackhole policy routing with > eth0's address as source address. Then my machine could not talk to 129.187.154.153 any more because eth1 is on a physically separated network. > P.S.: Cross posting this way is very impolite. Don't do it. Sorry, I didn't know where this belonged. Is linux-net correct? And thanks for the quick answer. Ciao, Roland - : send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
