Alan Cox wrote:
> > Now when the Linux box a.b.c.1 (with secondary address d.e.f.1) wants to
> > talk to the BSD/OS system d.e.f.2 it does
> >
> > a.b.c.1 arp who-has d.e.f.2
>
> That is presumably what your routing table says, that both are reachable via
> the ethernet
>
> > Which d.e.f.2 promptly ignores, presumably because the IP stack in BSD/OS
> > throws it away at a low level, or possibly simply because BSD/OS has no
> > idea where to send the ARP response.
>
> probably the latter if the routing table for d.e.f.* is wrong
>
> > Is this already fixed in 2.4 or it is something which needs investigation
> > and a patch?
>
> It doesnt look like a bug to me
Hmm. Doesn't the spec say something about that you should preferrably
use the "closest" IP number that you can find to communicate with a
host?
Yes, adding a route to "a.b.c.1 gw d.e.f.1" on the BSD box should
work.
But having a multi-homed host with a.b.c.1 on one side and d.e.f.1 on
the other, then I'd expecit it to use d.e.f.1 to communicate with
d.e.f.2, even if both are physically on the same ethernet.
Roger.
--
** [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** http://www.BitWizard.nl/ ** +31-15-2137555 **
*-- BitWizard writes Linux device drivers for any device you may have! --*
* Common sense is the collection of *
****** prejudices acquired by age eighteen. -- Albert Einstein ********
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
