----- Original Message -----
From: "Priscilla Oppenheimer"
>
> I also tried the original case, once I was sure Proxy ARP was really
> enabled. I left my PC on its normal office config on network 208.x.x.x,
but
> connected to the lab network. The router complained about the source being
> on a different cable and did not respond to an ARP for my default gateway.
> If I had my default gateway set to myself, causing me to ARP for
non-remote
> stations, the router also did not respond, complaining about the source
> being on a different cable. See Chuck's comments and quote from RFC below.
>
>
> Conclusions:
> Using Proxy ARP would not solve our travelling hotel user's problems. The
> user would have to do some reconfigs.
> Proxy ARP is a HACK.
I think the Cisco IOS have sensible constrains
preventing more disorderly configurations,
but there is other equipment that can do such global proxyarping.
For example Lucent Pipeline routers arrive with default config for
ethernet interface exactly fulfilling hotel scenario.
I got many calls about catastrophic failures in customers lans
when user didnt follow step-by-step recipe for Lucent box
configurations. Most worse but ridiculous case was when my
customer connected this to wireless cpe from another ISP
which stupidly uses bridge architecture for all customers in
one sector of WLL base. Then the link provided by us got
all traffic from that sector. :)
So proxyarp mechanism may become dangerous if
blindly used.
Pawel/
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=7907&t=5664
--------------------------------------------------
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
