Garrett and I discussed what IFF_NOARP should mean about 4-5 years
ago; we decided that it probably menat "no ARP". We discussed
the idea of seperating it out into two flags; "Don't reply to ARP"
and "don't pay attention to ARP" but decided to wait and see what
people thought. 4-5 years is proba
On Sat, Dec 08, 2001 at 02:33:31PM +0700, Eugene Grosbein wrote:
> > OK, I have a proposal that should fit both opinions. I'll keep the
> > net.link.ether.inet.static_arp to mean what it means now (keep ARP
> > table static, no updates except from local process through a routing
> > socket writes)
> If this is really want to do, I believe you can do it with existing
> tools.
>
> For simplicity, I'm just going to illustrate a way to set it up rather
> than explain it. Store your IP-MAC address pairs in flat file as
> proscribed in arp(8),
>
> 192.168.10.201:02:03:10:11:12
>
> OK, I have a proposal that should fit both opinions. I'll keep the
> net.link.ether.inet.static_arp to mean what it means now (keep ARP
> table static, no updates except from local process through a routing
> socket writes), and will add another sysctl that will switch the
> meaning of IFF_NOAR
On Thu, Dec 06, 2001 at 12:59:39PM -0800, Bill Fenner wrote:
>
> Garrett and I discussed what IFF_NOARP should mean about 4-5 years
> ago; we decided that it probably menat "no ARP". We discussed
> the idea of seperating it out into two flags; "Don't reply to ARP"
> and "don't pay attention to A
On Thu, Dec 06, 2001 at 12:59:39PM -0800, Bill Fenner wrote:
>
> Garrett and I discussed what IFF_NOARP should mean about 4-5 years
> ago; we decided that it probably menat "no ARP". We discussed
> the idea of seperating it out into two flags; "Don't reply to ARP"
> and "don't pay attention to A
Garrett and I discussed what IFF_NOARP should mean about 4-5 years
ago; we decided that it probably menat "no ARP". We discussed
the idea of seperating it out into two flags; "Don't reply to ARP"
and "don't pay attention to ARP" but decided to wait and see what
people thought. 4-5 years is prob
On Wed, Dec 05, 2001 at 07:38:59PM +0200, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
> The below patch implements this facility, activated by setting the
> net.link.ether.inet.static_arp sysctl to a non-zero value. It also
> fixes an mbuf leak in arpresolve() if IFF_NOARP flag is set on an
> interface, and an addres
On Wed, Dec 05, 2001 at 01:52:48PM -0500, Louis A. Mamakos wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 05, 2001 at 01:35:52PM -0500, Louis A. Mamakos wrote:
> > > Doesn't this behavior need to be on a per-interface basis? I'm wondering
> > > if a single sysctl is sufficient to get the desired effect.
> > >
> > No, w
> On Wed, Dec 05, 2001 at 01:35:52PM -0500, Louis A. Mamakos wrote:
> > Doesn't this behavior need to be on a per-interface basis? I'm wondering
> > if a single sysctl is sufficient to get the desired effect.
> >
> No, we want ARP table to stay intact no matter which interface
> sends us an upda
On Wed, Dec 05, 2001 at 01:35:52PM -0500, Louis A. Mamakos wrote:
> Doesn't this behavior need to be on a per-interface basis? I'm wondering
> if a single sysctl is sufficient to get the desired effect.
>
No, we want ARP table to stay intact no matter which interface
sends us an update.
Cheers
Doesn't this behavior need to be on a per-interface basis? I'm wondering
if a single sysctl is sufficient to get the desired effect.
louie
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
On Wed, Dec 05, 2001 at 07:38:59PM +0200, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 05, 2001 at 11:17:35PM +0700, Eugene Grosbein wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 05, 2001 at 04:03:16AM -0800, Crist J . Clark wrote:
> >
> > > > Not sure what is correct list, this is about network security.
> > > > Flag NOARP did
On Wed, Dec 05, 2001 at 11:17:35PM +0700, Eugene Grosbein wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 05, 2001 at 04:03:16AM -0800, Crist J . Clark wrote:
>
> > > Not sure what is correct list, this is about network security.
> > > Flag NOARP did not work for ethernet interface before 4.4-RELEASE.
> > > We needed stati
On Wed, Dec 05, 2001 at 04:03:16AM -0800, Crist J . Clark wrote:
> > Not sure what is correct list, this is about network security.
> > Flag NOARP did not work for ethernet interface before 4.4-RELEASE.
> > We needed static ARP table so used local patch for it.
> > 4.4-RELEASE implemented NOARP b
On Wed, Dec 05, 2001 at 12:44:30PM +0700, Eugene Grosbein wrote:
> Hi!
> Not sure what is correct list, this is about network security.
>
> Flag NOARP did not work for ethernet interface before 4.4-RELEASE.
> We needed static ARP table so used local patch for it.
> 4.4-RELEASE implemented NOARP b
Hi!
Not sure what is correct list, this is about network security.
Flag NOARP did not work for ethernet interface before 4.4-RELEASE.
We needed static ARP table so used local patch for it.
4.4-RELEASE implemented NOARP but in the different way.
Now a router even does not respond to clients askin
17 matches
Mail list logo
