From owner-freebsd-chat Wed Mar 13 14:22:40 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from flood.ping.uio.no (flood.ping.uio.no [129.240.78.31]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BACD37B41A for ; Wed, 13 Mar 2002 14:22:33 -0800 (PST) Received: by flood.ping.uio.no (Postfix, from userid 2602) id D66845347; Wed, 13 Mar 2002 23:22:31 +0100 (CET) X-URL: http://www.ofug.org/~des/ X-Disclaimer: The views expressed in this message do not necessarily coincide with those of any organisation or company with which I am or have been affiliated. To: "Jeremy C. Reed" Cc: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ethernet interface listening to other interface's IP References: From: Dag-Erling Smorgrav Date: 13 Mar 2002 23:22:31 +0100 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Lines: 13 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) Emacs/21.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org "Jeremy C. Reed" writes: > What is the correct behaviour and why? Both are correct, under different circumstances. What you describe is called the weak ES model (ES == End System == host), and what you wish for is called the strong ES model. See section 3.3.4.2 of RFC1122. In FreeBSD, use the net.inet.check_interface sysctl to control this behaviour. DES -- Dag-Erling Smorgrav - des@ofug.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message