From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 23 Sep 2001 17:55:58 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 23 Sep 2001 17:55:40 -0400 Received: from pilot17.cl.msu.edu ([35.9.5.37]:59833 "EHLO pilot17.cl.msu.edu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sun, 23 Sep 2001 17:55:25 -0400 From: "Pei Zheng" To: Subject: an IP stack problem regarding routing and ARP Date: Sun, 23 Sep 2001 17:56:14 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gb2312" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.3018.1300 Importance: Normal Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, Sorry to bother you all. My question is about the Linux kernel IP stack regarding routing tables and ARP. Basically I am considering a hack on the IP stack for the purpose of routing emulation(emulating 2 routers in one kernel): If a Linux box has 2 NICs, I would like to generate some packets in the kernel, sent them out from one NIC to an Ethernet switch, and then receive them on the other NIC. Is it possible, with the help of appropriate routing table, routing rules and ARP configuration? Or the kernel IP stack must be modified? It seems to me that if the kernel figures out that a packet's next hop is its local network interface, it will deliver to that interface through IP stack directly. Thanks! -Pei Zheng