Hello!
> Is there a reason that the target hardware address isn't the target
> hardware address?
It is bound only to the fact that linux uses protocol address
of the machine, which responds. It would be highly confusing
(more than confusing :-)), if we used our protocol address and hardware
address of requestor.
But if you use zero protocol address as source, you really can use
any hw address.
> The dhcp clients I examined, and the implementation of the arpcheck
> that I use will compare the target hardware field of the arp-reply and
> match it against its own mac, to verify the reply. And this fails with
> the current implementation in the kernel.
1. Do not do this. Mainly, because you already know that this does not work
with linux. :-) Logically, target hw address in arp reply is just
a nonsensial redundancy, it should not be checked and even looked at.
2. What's about your suggestion, I thought about this and I am going to agree.
Arguments, which convinced me are:
- arping still works.
- any piece of reasonable software should work.
- if Windows understands DaD (is it really true? I cannot believe)
and it is unhappy about our responce and does not block use
of duplicate address only due to this, we _must_ accomodate ASAP.
- if we do,we have to use 0 protocol address, no choice.
Alexey
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
