Date: Mon, 19 Jul 1999 19:40:11 -0400 From: "Allen Smith" <easmith@beatrice.rutgers.edu> To: Oliver Fromme <olli@dorifer.heim3.tu-clausthal.de>, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Snapshots Message-ID: <9907191940.ZM5053@beatrice.rutgers.edu> In-Reply-To: Oliver Fromme <olli@dorifer.heim3.tu-clausthal.de> "Re: Snapshots" (Jul 19, 7:00pm) References: <199907192307.BAA16212@dorifer.heim3.tu-clausthal.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Jul 19, 7:00pm, Oliver Fromme (possibly) wrote: > Allen Smith wrote in list.freebsd-stable: > > Is choparp still functional? What are the symptoms of the proxy ARP > > breakage (just doesn't happen, or what)? > > Uh... I _really_ hope that choparp is still functional, > since I heavily depend on it. It should be; the problem is with arp -s. (I'd thought the problem was with arp_proxyall, which we're about to be heavily dependent upon...) > I understand that choparp does not depend on the kernel's > internal handling of ARP requests, but it rather does > everything itself. Is that correct? In that case it should > continue to work. If choparp refuses to work, I'll be in > serious trouble. choparp uses a BPF interface to pick up and transmit its packets, so you're right, it doesn't depend on the kernel's handling. -Allen -- Allen Smith easmith@beatrice.rutgers.edu To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?9907191940.ZM5053>