On Wed, Dec 08, 2004 at 06:21:07PM -0800, Bruce M Simpson wrote: > On Wed, Dec 08, 2004 at 03:53:07PM +0100, Andre Oppermann wrote: > > I'll take care of this but I'm busy right now. Look into it later this > > week. > > Thanks for looking into this, this is one of the items which came up on > the TODO lists of three separate projects (TowardEX's, XORP's, and the > Network Junta's). If you aren't able to look at it let us know so someone > else can step up to the mic. > > Of course, the sooner we can remove ARP's special meaning from RTF_REJECT, > the better - that would let us implement RTF_REJECT in the fastforwarding > path without further worry.
When we have routing table cleaned up (e.g. remove arp off of it), I'll look into getting out some patch for installing /32 host routes for all receive-adjacent addresses. This way we don't have to run a hash lookup at ip_fastforward() to find out whether address belongs to us. We can simply either route it to lo0 as a receive-path (like in Cisco GSR/7500 rcvpath and Juniper loopback path) or send it to a separate input handling routine with packet filtering before returning to ip_input. Unless ofcourse, someone already has it made up and ready to go -- in that case there is no need ;) Thanks, -J -- James Jun TowardEX Technologies, Inc. Technical Lead Boston IPv4/IPv6 Web Hosting, Colocation and [EMAIL PROTECTED] Network design/consulting & configuration services cell: 1(978)-394-2867 web: http://www.towardex.com , noc: www.twdx.net _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
