Subject: Re: better ARP handling in IPv4 alias address
To: Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino <>
From: Luke Mewburn <>
List: tech-net
Date: 07/04/2001 01:49:10
On Tue, Jul 03, 2001 at 05:43:07PM +0900, Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino wrote:
> 	do people think it worthwhile to bring this in?  basically, this
> 	changes behavior of ARP logic against IPv4 alias addresses (non-first
> 	address).

I haven't had a chance to fully test this yet, but if it works as
advertised I think it's a great idea.

It means that we'll be able to remove the requirement to do
	route add <ipaddress> localhost
after configuring <ipaddress> as an alias so that "ping <ipaddress>"
actually works.

BTW: for those who don't know, this requirement was actually necessary
for all addresses (including primary addresses on an interface) until
itojun's recent RTF_CLONING improvements, and was a bug that had
annoyed me for a long time. I discussed this with itojun recently and
he wasn't aware that he'd actually fixed this annoying bug as a side
effect of those changes :-)