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, 29 Nov 2001 14:43:46 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 14:43:37 -0500 Received: from unused ([66.187.233.239]:47880 "EHLO mail.redhat.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 14:43:19 -0500 From: kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru Message-Id: <200111291911.WAA06769@ms2.inr.ac.ru> Subject: Re: net/ipv4/arp.c: arp_rcv, rfc2131 BREAKS communication To: ja@ssi.bg (Julian Anastasov) Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 22:11:40 +0300 (MSK) Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: from "Julian Anastasov" at Nov 26, 1 02:15:01 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hello! > directly. I'm not sure there is a standard for duplicate address > detection. The procedure is prescribed in rfc on dhcp, which is sort of standard. > In this case the gap for race is small. There is no races there. Before DAD did not pass address must not be used, that's all. This is also described unambigously in dhcp specs. Alexey