From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+willy=40w.ods.org@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S270321AbTHQPcE (ORCPT <rfc822;willy@w.ods.org>);
	Sun, 17 Aug 2003 11:32:04 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S270319AbTHQPcE
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing>);
	Sun, 17 Aug 2003 11:32:04 -0400
Received: from pc1-cwma1-5-cust4.swan.cable.ntl.com ([80.5.120.4]:35981 "EHLO
	dhcp23.swansea.linux.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S270295AbTHQPcA (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Sun, 17 Aug 2003 11:32:00 -0400
Subject: Re: [2.4 PATCH] bugfix: ARP respond on all devices
From: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To: Carlos Velasco <carlosev@newipnet.com>
Cc: Lamont Granquist <lamont@scriptkiddie.org>,
       Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>, "David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com>,
       bloemsaa@xs4all.nl, Marcelo Tosatti <marcelo@conectiva.com.br>,
       netdev@oss.sgi.com, linux-net@vger.kernel.org, layes@loran.com,
       torvalds@osdl.org,
       Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <200308171555280781.0067FB36@192.168.128.16>
References: <Pine.LNX.3.96.1030728222606.21100A-100000@gatekeeper.tmr.com>
	 <20030728213933.F81299@coredump.scriptkiddie.org>
	 <200308171509570955.003E4FEC@192.168.128.16>
	 <200308171516090038.0043F977@192.168.128.16>
	 <1061127715.21885.35.camel@dhcp23.swansea.linux.org.uk>
	 <200308171555280781.0067FB36@192.168.128.16>
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <1061134091.21886.40.camel@dhcp23.swansea.linux.org.uk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.3 (1.4.3-3) 
Date: 17 Aug 2003 16:28:12 +0100
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Sul, 2003-08-17 at 14:55, Carlos Velasco wrote:
> >> According to RFC 1027:
> >> http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1027.txt
> >
> >Proxy ARP only.
> 
> So, if you have a router performing Proxy ARP... you don't need to
> reply to the "bad" Linux ARP Request, right?

Linux doesn't issue "bad" requests. Linux will reply when it is
asked for an address that it owns, as per RFC826, unless you chose
to change the behaviour with things like arpfilter.