From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S272596AbTG1AVm (ORCPT ); Sun, 27 Jul 2003 20:21:42 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S272595AbTG1AVG (ORCPT ); Sun, 27 Jul 2003 20:21:06 -0400 Received: from 5.Red-80-32-157.pooles.rima-tde.net ([80.32.157.5]:35846 "EHLO smtp.newipnet.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S272585AbTG1AUV (ORCPT ); Sun, 27 Jul 2003 20:20:21 -0400 Message-ID: <200307280235210263.10AADFF8@192.168.128.16> In-Reply-To: <20030727171403.6e5bcc58.davem@redhat.com> References: <200307280140470646.1078EC67@192.168.128.16> <20030727164649.517b2b88.davem@redhat.com> <200307280158250677.10891156@192.168.128.16> <20030727165831.05904792.davem@redhat.com> <200307280211590888.10957DD9@192.168.128.16> <20030727171403.6e5bcc58.davem@redhat.com> X-Mailer: Calypso Version 3.30.00.00 (4) Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2003 02:35:21 +0200 From: "Carlos Velasco" To: "David S. Miller" Cc: bloemsaa@xs4all.nl, marcelo@conectiva.com.br, netdev@oss.sgi.com, linux-net@vger.kernel.org, layes@loran.com, torvalds@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [2.4 PATCH] bugfix: ARP respond on all devices Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 27/07/2003 at 17:14 David S. Miller wrote: >[ Please wrap your lines at 72 characters, you emails are really > difficult to read and reply to, thanks. ] Done. >This only means your problem can also be fixed by correcting >your routing tables. Playing with routing table and using arp_filter. Or using the hidden patch. Or using a tool for filtering arp as iparp or netfilter/arpfilter. IMHO "hidden" is the simpliest (provided it's compiled in the kernel). >Show me the standard that Linux violates by behaving in this way? >There are none, our behavior is perfectly acceptable. Sure it's... I have never said it's wrong, I only say that its behaviour is different to other OS and it's NOT usual. And on certain scenaries it could be a desired behaviour. >Other systems do not give you the capabilities our routing layer does, >such as route based source address selections. So it is no surprise >that they behave differently in this area. Problem is that linux is unable to behave like the other OS and systems do in a simple way. The easy way is the "hidden" patch, if it's applied in the kernel. Regards, Carlos Velasco