Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 7 Dec 2001 11:05:42 +0200
From:      Ruslan Ermilov <ru@FreeBSD.ORG>
To:        Bill Fenner <fenner@research.att.com>
Cc:        cjclark@alum.mit.edu, net@FreeBSD.ORG, security@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: NOARP - gateway must answer and have frozen ARP table
Message-ID:  <20011207110542.J13705@sunbay.com>
In-Reply-To: <200112062059.MAA02282@windsor.research.att.com>
References:  <20011205124430.A83642@svzserv.kemerovo.su> <20011205040316.H40864@blossom.cjclark.org> <20011205231735.A1361@grosbein.pp.ru> <20011205193859.B79705@sunbay.com> <200112051835.fB5IZqH95521@whizzo.transsys.com> <20011205204526.B89520@sunbay.com> <200112051852.fB5IqmH95809@whizzo.transsys.com> <20011205121928.A3061@blossom.cjclark.org> <200112062059.MAA02282@windsor.research.att.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
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 ARP" but decided to wait and see what
> people thought.  4-5 years is probably enough time to wait =)
> 
Heh, but only a few months ago IFF_NOARP started to DTRT.

> My proposal: keep IFF_NOARP, but add IFF_NOSENDARP and IFF_NOREPLYARP
> (or something, I'm no good at making up names).  I agree with Louie
> that it makes sense for these to be per-interface as opposed to
> Ruslan's sysctl.
> 
What you propose is even more "flexible".  :-)
What's the purpose to send arp requests (!IFF_NOSENDARP) if we're not
going to listen the replies (IFF_NOREPLYARP)?

Also, ifnet.if_flags is declared "short" and is already fully allocated.
Changing it to u_int64_t would mean introducing binary incompatibility,
and what's worse, API changes, since ifreq.ifr_flags is also "short".

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_NOARP from "no arp" to "static arp on this interface".
How about this?


Cheers,
-- 
Ruslan Ermilov		Oracle Developer/DBA,
ru@sunbay.com		Sunbay Software AG,
ru@FreeBSD.org		FreeBSD committer,
+380.652.512.251	Simferopol, Ukraine

http://www.FreeBSD.org	The Power To Serve
http://www.oracle.com	Enabling The Information Age

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20011207110542.J13705>