Ursula Braun wrote on 05/23/2012 04:20:43 AM: > On Mon, 2012-05-21 at 06:41 -0500, David Boyes wrote: > > On 5/21/12 4:11 AM, "Ursula Braun" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > >we reported this problem in Novell bugzilla 617373. Solution has been to > > >introduce a SEND_GRATUITOUS_ARP config option. Its default is "no". > > >Changing it to "yes" should trigger the sending of gratuitous ARPs. The > > >config option is offered starting with sysconfig-0.71.30-0.10.1. > > > > When would this NOT be the correct behavior? Seems like the default should > > be yes, given that that's the way ARP has worked for decades. > > The solution with SEND_GRATUITOUS_ARP config option is provided by SUSE. > They would have to change the default to "yes". We have never asked for > this default change.
I feel compelled to point out that this discussion has been about a Linux host using a Layer 2 interface. If I understand the scenario correctly, the virtual NIC is coupled to a VSWITCH which is defined with the ETHERNET (not IP) option, so it *is* appropriate to have this Linux host generating gratuitous ARP frames when the interface is ready (or perhaps when the server ports are open and ready to handle inbound requests). When the VSWITCH is defined with the IP option, ARP responsibility is offloaded to the OSA hardware, so the Linux host should *not* be sending ARP frames on that interface. This is just a reminder in case somebody using VSWITCH(IP) interfaces finds this thread and assumes SEND_GRATUITOUS_ARP is universally good. Regards, Dennis Musselwhite z/VM CP Development ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For more information on Linux on System z, visit http://wiki.linuxvm.org/
