Marc Singer wrote:
On Mon, Dec 05, 2005 at 09:01:00AM -0500, John W. Linville wrote:
On Sat, Dec 03, 2005 at 10:33:32AM -0800, Ben Greear wrote:
Al Boldi wrote:
Here specifically, ip/ifconfig is implemented upside-down requiring a
link/dev to exist for an address to be defined, in effect containing layer
3 inside layer 2, when an address should be allowed to be defined w/o a
link/dev much like an app is allowed to be defined w/o an address.
[Removed lkml from CC list]
You can add multiple virtual IP addresses to physical interfaces. It
makes no sense to have an IP without any association to an interface
in my opinion. Often, when you have multiple interfaces, you most
definately
want different IPs associated specifically with particular interfaces.
Think about redundant paths, routers, firewalls, and such.
The association between IP addresses and links is already a bit murky.
Reference the arp_announce sysctl for what I mean. I recall Dave M.
emphasizing on at least one occassion that IP addresses belong to
the _box_, not to the link.
I think Al B.'s idea merits some consideration. I definitely think
we blur the distinctions between L2 and L3 a bit too much in places.
Of course, patches would be helpful...
Precisely the case. It should be the case that a box response to an
arp on *any* interface for *any* IP address known to the box.
I certainly don't mind if this is a configurable, or even default
behaviour, but we also need the ability to only respond to particular
arps on particular interfaces, based on the IP addresses assigned
to those interfaces. I am able to get this particular arp binding working
today, so I'm not suggesting changes, just mentioning that there are other
configurations than what you mention that are useful to people.
As for changing the behavior, I haven't seen a compelling reason to
change it. IMHO, without a motivating case, we would be mucking about
without a clear goal.
Agreed.
Thanks,
Ben
-
: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
Ben Greear <greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com
-
: 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
