Tony,
You can give an NT box multiple DG's, but it will only use the 2nd
one if it believes the 1st DG is down. It detects this through the
use of TCP, so if your machine loses a TCP session to something
reached through DG number 1, it will fail over to DG number 2.
Proxy-arp can be used with dual attached machines, it's probably
the easiest solution but you could also run RIP in passive mode on
the box to get updates about the networks in use or just setup
static routes.
Regards,
Kent
On 24 May 2001, at 11:20, Tony Medeiros wrote:
> Proxy arp is still used on duel homed servers. Say you have an NT box
> that has a NIC on two different networks serviced by two different
> routers that reach different networks. You can't give the box two
> different default gateways. Proxy arp is your only solution. Right
> ???? Tony M. #6172 ----- Original Message ----- From: Hire, Ejay To:
> Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2001 7:31 AM Subject: RE: ARP versus Proxy-arp
> [7:5664]
>
>
> > Proxy arp isn't dead, it is still in use very frequently on dial-up
> > links. If you get a chance, dial-up to earthlink and run winipcfg.
> > You'll see
> that
> > your default gateway is actually set to yourself. Their is a
> > reasonable explanation of this behavior in the Sybex CCNP switch 2.0
> > chapter on redundancy.
> >
> > -EH
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Chuck Larrieu [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2001 10:37 PM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: ARP versus Proxy-arp [7:5664]
> >
> >
> > At the risk of becoming another Bob Vance......
> >
> > I'm reading Doug Comer's TCP/IP reference, on the assumption that it
> > can't hurt to really get into how TCP/IP works.
> >
> > Proxy-arp versus normal arp.
> >
> > A host does not know the physical address of another host so it
> > sends out
> an
> > ARP request. If the host in question lies on another network, a
> > router responds to that request. Proxy ARP, correct?
> >
> > A host through it's TCP stack does the XOR and determines that a
> > host lies on another network. The host therefore sends the packet to
> > the device indicated as its default gateway in its configuration. It
> > sends an ARP request for the MAC of the default gateway. Normal ARP?
> >
> > So in other words, proxy arp may be viewed as something of an
> > obsolete protocol / operation in that most modern TCP stacks contain
> > the mechanisms for doing the network XOR determination, and then
> > using the default
> gateway.
> > A modern stack would recognize that a host is on a different network
> > and
> go
> > the default gateway route, so to speak.
> >
> > In other words, the necessity for proxy arp is eliminated for the
> > most
> part
> > because of the default gateway concept and the modern TCP stack.
> >
> > Has it sunk through this thick head finally?
> >
> > PS Comer states that proxy arp is aka arp hack. :->
> >
> > Chuck
> >
> > One IOS to forward them all.
> > One IOS to find them.
> > One IOS to summarize them all
> > And in the routing table bind them.
> >
> > -JRR Chambers-
> > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
> > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
> > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and
> Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=5801&t=5664
--------------------------------------------------
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
