From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 25 Jan 2001 12:14:10 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 25 Jan 2001 12:14:00 -0500 Received: from quechua.inka.de ([212.227.14.2]:39716 "EHLO mail.inka.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 25 Jan 2001 12:13:50 -0500 Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 18:08:58 +0100 To: Julian Anastasov Cc: linux-kernel Subject: Re: Turning off ARP in linux-2.4.0 Message-ID: <20010125180858.A32328@lina.inka.de> In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.12i In-Reply-To: ; from ja@ssi.bg on Thu, Jan 25, 2001 at 01:02:32PM +0200 From: Bernd Eckenfels Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jan 25, 2001 at 01:02:32PM +0200, Julian Anastasov wrote: > Hey, the world is not only Linux. Sometimes the people build > clusters using different hardware and software. If your solution works > for your setup we can't claim it is universal. It is a Linux News Group after all. So dont confuse us with Broken Operating Systems. And of course we don't need a Hidden flag in Linux to solve other Operating Systems Auto-Binding. > When you send the IPIP datagram again to real server in the > LAN you have the same problem. Yes, you are right, -arp is needed in that system, too. Or you need WAN Distributed Services. > You can't always use -arp!!! Read above. Fix the manual! BTW > in this thread I don't see wrong docs. Which ones claim this? The Manual is OK. It claims that -arp will work and it claims that on some Linux Sytems it wont (i am not sure why it should not work on old kernels but i accept it). > > -arp can work if you maintain a fresh copy in /etc/ethers and > when you don't use ARP. But then you don't need to set -arp flag. The > setup will work without setting -arp to lo or eth, right? If you don't > use ARP why to stop it in the interface? In theory we will not see any > ARP packets, even from the uplink router. I am not sure about this, because of the neighbour alive discovery. I dont know if a hard wired ARP Address will stop that. > > it is changing the packets MAC destination address (or using an IPIP tunnel). > > Tunnel to where? To real server in the LAN or to another > real server? To the real server on the LAN, the server is the endpoint. As written in LVS Docs. > You are lucky to use Linux on all hosts. May be you have one > extra uplink router (a Linux box)? You can turn off arp discovery on every reasonable pwerfull router. And I dont see a situation where you want to build a HA/HP Cluster using you ISPs Router as a core component and the ISP is not cooperating with you. > > They are not complicated more in 2.4. The current handling in 2.4 > is same. I already said that the net maintainers are planning other > features for 2.4 and the hidden feature is not considered. Until then > there is no difference between the kernels and the hidden feature can > be used even in 2.4. There is no hidden Feature in 2.4, thats why we have started the thread. And for exactly this reason I suggested to use -arp. Greetings Bernd -- (OO) -- Bernd_Eckenfels@Wendelinusstrasse39.76646Bruchsal.de -- ( .. ) ecki@{inka.de,linux.de,debian.org} http://home.pages.de/~eckes/ o--o *plush* 2048/93600EFD eckes@irc +497257930613 BE5-RIPE (O____O) When cryptography is outlawed, bayl bhgynjf jvyy unir cevinpl! - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/