The router would proxy arp if it has a more specific route out another interface.
But it's a hack and I would not design my network around it working personally. Rodney On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 01:05:12PM +0200, Elmar K. Bins wrote: > Re:) > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Whisper) wrote: > > > There was a big discussion on this list about proxy-arp several months ago. > > And I do suppose that's why I find proxy-arp quite suspicious, and why I > asked about someone having a different idea for a solution. > > > Do a search for the forums that keep this in forum format to read up about > > it. > > I will refresh my memory :) > > About Terry's question: > > The servers and the service address are NOT on the same subnet, > I must have explained badly. > > ISP-to-Router: a.b.c.d/28 (think 192.0.2.0/28) > Router-to-Servers: 192.168.1.0/24 > Server Loopback: a.b.c.+3 (think 192.0.2.3) > > Yours, > Elmi. > > > > +--- [Server] > > >[ISP]---| a.b.c.d/28 |--[Router]--+--- [Server] > > > +--- [Server] > > > > > > > 3750#show run | i relevant > > > ! > > > interface vlan 10 > > > description OUTSIDE > > > ip address a.b.c.+2 255.255.255.240 > > > ! > > > interface vlan 11 > > > description INSIDE > > > ip address 192.168.1.1 255.255.255.0 > > > ! > > > ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 a.b.c.+1 > > > ip route a.b.c.+3 255.255.255.255 192.168.1.2 > > > ip route a.b.c.+3 255.255.255.255 192.168.1.3 > > > ip route a.b.c.+3 255.255.255.255 192.168.1.4 > > > ! > > > ip cef > > > ip cef load-sharing algorithm tunnel > > _______________________________________________ > cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
