On 14-11-14 20:27, Simon Goldschmidt [via lwIP] wrote:
> HaaCee2 wrote:
>
> > I am not entirely familiar with the ideas behind LwIP. But sourcebased
> > routing is very much in line with rfc1122 (ip for hosts). I quote:
> >
> >> Under the Strong ES model, the route computation for an outgoing
> datagram
> >> is the mapping:
> >>
> >> route(src IP addr, dest IP addr, TOS) ->
> gateway
> >>
> >> Here the source address is included as a parameter in order to
> select a
> >> gateway that is directly reachable on the corresponding physical
> >> interface. Note that this model logically requires that in general
> there
> >> be at least one default gateway, and preferably multiple defaults, for
> >> each IP source address.
>
> Well, that excerpt is one of 2 possibilities in the RFC. The other
> possibility is to do like lwIP does. I admit though that it looks kind
> of strange sending packets with IP address A to the interface B just
> because you have a matching destination gateway on that netif...
You are correct that it is only 1 of the 2 possibilities, and as
indicated I am not familiar with the design of lwIP. So it's a perfectly
valid choice NOT to support sourcebased routing.
>
> By now, I'm tempted to add source-based routing as an option, although I
> expect people using lwIP wih more than one interface being only a small
> percentage...
I beg to differ....
In my opinion the best approach to deal with vlans is to have multiple
interfaces and then I think one is required to do sourcebased routing.
Otherwise datagrams destined for a host on one vlan can be visible on
another vlan (which is obviously undesirable).
Multiple stacks is a possibility here as well, but in embedded designs
hardly an option....
Erik
>
>
> Simon
>
> _______________________________________________
> lwip-users mailing list
> [hidden email] </user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=23524&i=0>
> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the
> discussion below:
> http://lwip.100.n7.nabble.com/Sending-to-a-non-local-network-without-default-netif-set-tp22981p23524.html
>
>
> To unsubscribe from Sending to a non-local network without default
> netif set, click here
> <http://lwip.100.n7.nabble.com/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=unsubscribe_by_code&node=22981&code=ZXZ2ZWVsZW5AYWltdmFsbGV5Lm5sfDIyOTgxfC01NzI0OTAwNzY=>.
> NAML
> <http://lwip.100.n7.nabble.com/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=macro_viewer&id=instant_html%21nabble%3Aemail.naml&base=nabble.naml.namespaces.BasicNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NabbleNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NodeNamespace&breadcrumbs=notify_subscribers%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-instant_emails%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-send_instant_email%21nabble%3Aemail.naml>
>
>
--
Erik van Veelen
AimValley B.V.
Utrechtseweg 38, 1213 TV Hilversum, The Netherlands
Tel: +31 35 689 1929, Fax: +31 35 689 1901
AimValley certificate
http://www.aimvalley.com/aimvalley-ca-certificate-2007.crt
--
View this message in context:
http://lwip.100.n7.nabble.com/Sending-to-a-non-local-network-without-default-netif-set-tp22981p23525.html
Sent from the lwip-users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
lwip-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users
