> I can't think of single reason why you'd need proxy-arp, ever. I ran into such a reason, recently. We were migrating a customer from a competitors colo to ours, and the customer had been using a Linux-based L2 firewall as their router. We needed to create a temporary IPSec tunnel so that the customer devices could reach the new colo, but they were unwilling to create such a tunnel on their Linux box, so we could only place a router *within* their colo LAN, behind the Linux box, using routable addresses. The quickest solution was to run proxy-arp at both ends. Yes, static arp's are better, but the customer was not positive about which hosts needed to use the temporary tunnel.
That said, most times, particularly with junior network types, proxy-arp creates more problems than it solves, and I insist it be disabled by default. -- Stephen Saku Ytti wrote: > On (2008-03-22 12:16 -0400), Julio Arruda wrote: > >> I do remember one specific topology (DMS switches with EIUs and etc), >> where proxy-arp was used as a requirement in some configurations. > > I can't think of single reason why you'd need proxy-arp, ever. > However, for residential connections local-proxy-arp is commonly needed > feature > and for some cruel and unusual reason local-proxy-arp does not work without > having proxy-arp also on (at least this was the case in 12.2SB, hopefully > fixed since, didn't bother opening DDTS, but just as writing this, I > checked for DDTS and fond CSCds43725, no fixed IOS' so far) > _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
