tech-net archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]

Re: Static interface routes for IP address on different subnet doesn't send an ARP who-has

David Young <> writes:

> On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 12:39:04PM -0400, Greg Troxel wrote:
>> Sorry, but you are basically doing something that does not conform to
>> Internet standards, and that will probably require some code reading.
> It's customary to configure a small subnet for host and gateway to
> share, and then to configure a route to the gateway, but is that
> because an Internet standard says it should be so (and why does it say
> so?) or because that is easiest or the only feasible way in the BSD
> implementation?

I'd say that it is irregular to expect a host (or router) to arp for and
send packets to another hour/router that does not fall within the
prefix.  It's difficult in BSD precisely because it was irregular (and
unthinkably bizarre) back in the day.

So this is really about "how do you send a packet to another host on
your subet", and there's no real support in standards that I know of for
what to do about sending packets on a broadcast interface to hosts that
are not within that interface's prefix.

So perhaps I'm wrong, and it would be interesting to see
standaards-track RFC text that suggests the disjoint-/32 approach is ok.

Attachment: pgpnYJSgDlszp.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index