On Mon, Dec 05, 2005 at 10:00:41AM -0800, Ben Greear wrote: > Marc Singer wrote: > >On Mon, Dec 05, 2005 at 09:01:00AM -0500, John W. Linville wrote: > >>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. > >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 It was not my intention to derail this discussion to the arp_announce topic. I only cited it as an example where the IP address <-> interface mapping is not 100% absolute. John -- John W. Linville linville@xxxxxxxxxxxxx - : 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
