From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Carlos Velasco" Subject: Re: Bug? ARP with wrong src IP address Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2003 18:04:14 +0200 Sender: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com Message-ID: <200307241804140253.00527C89@192.168.128.16> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: "Bart De Schuymer" , netdev@oss.sgi.com Return-path: In-Reply-To: To: "Julian Anastasov" Errors-to: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On 24/07/2003 at 18:54 Julian Anastasov wrote: > I now see, it is the so called "ARP Problem" in the IPVS >context, many real servers and one director sharing same virtual >IP: > >http://www.linuxvirtualserver.org/ > >The most used feature for such setups: >http://www.ssi.bg/~ja/#hidden Julian, This would be another approach, configuring the IP address on the ethernet interface (ex. eth0:2) and not advertising or replying arp with the hidden patch. However the usual approach is configuring the destination IP address on a loopback interface that does real "hiding" as it's no more in ethernet interface. Dispatched mode: http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/sw/iosswrel/ps1833/products_feature_guide09186a0080086f2b.html#2728293 As long as I know, Solaris 8 and Windows 2000 have no problems with the ARP Request, as they use the src IP address of the ethernet interface. But as I have seen in the RFC it seems that Cisco devices should reply to this ARP request without looking into the source ip address. I will open a TAC case and see if they raise a bug. Regards, Carlos Velasco