[lkml]   [2003]   [Aug]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [2.4 PATCH] bugfix: ARP respond on all devices
Lars Marowsky-Bree <> writes:

> Yes, both are "correct" in the sense that the RFC allows this
> interpretation. The _sensible_ interpretation for practical networking
> however is #2, and the only persons who seem to believe differently are
> those in charge of the Linux network code...

Just spend a minute to think about multihoming and failover
between multiple links on a host.

For that the Linux default makes a lot of sense - you get automatic
transparent failover between interfaces without any effort.

In my experience everybody who wants a different behaviour use some
more or less broken stateful L2/L3 switching hacks (like ipvs) or
having broken routing tables. While such hacks may be valid for some
uses they should not impact the default case.


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:47    [W:0.084 / U:23.428 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site