On Tue, 19 Aug 2003 09:53:02 -0700 "David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com> wrote: > On Tue, 19 Aug 2003 18:52:19 +0200 > Stephan von Krawczynski <skraw@ithnet.com> wrote: > > > On Tue, 19 Aug 2003 08:57:17 -0700 > > "David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > > "Be liberal in what you accept, and conservative in what you send" > > > -Jon Postel > > > > If I understood what Richard said in this thread Jon just shot you > > down. The conservative way to _request_ arp would definitely be to > > request it from the "correct" subnet, because as a sender you ought > > to give credit to knowing that "bad" boxes out there won't answer if > > you do otherwise. > > In the ARP request we are using the source address in the packet we > are building for output. > > If ARP doesn't work using that source address, we can only assume IP > communication is not possible either. > > It is the box not responding to this ARP which is preventing > communication not the box creating the ARP request. Please read my example from other email. Very simple to prove you wrong here. Regards, Stephan - : 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
