-> However, using these addresses is a BAD BAD idea. A lot of other -> machines will be expecting 127.x to mean something speacial. I dont -> think you should ask the poster for wages, he will suffer enough with -> ARPs etc ;-> Don't want to start an entire, "why would you do this" here, however, because of.... -> -> What is so wrong with RFC198 addresses?? -> Really RFC1918 you mean... Well if your product is placed behind a nat'd network, MOST if not ALL nat'd network addresses on the "inside" use the RFC1918 address space. So I have this working in my products now. I had to do something a bit different in that I want a "special" 127.xx.xx.xx range to be sent out on the wire. So here is what I did. 1. Make the "lo" interface 127.0.0.1/24 instead of 127.0.0.1/8 2. Change handing in an arp receive function. 3. Change handling in arptx. 4. And there was something else I had to do in route.c. (I can find it, but I can't remember off hand what it was). I also did this with the 2.6.10 kernel. However, there are friends that I have given this to that have it working on 2.4 based kernels. - : send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
