On 7/7/12 1:24 AM, "Jared Mauch" <ja...@puck.nether.net> wrote:
>Die proxy arp die. (and that's not German). > >I've had a job or consulting gig or two that has inadvertently had this >as the hidden glue making things work. > >(wha, you can't route that subnet out an Ethernet interface without a >next hop? It's always worked....) > >I fight with sysadmins to this day about the concept of a broadcast >domain and subnet... If I hear another case of someone saying that switch >is the "80" subnet when there are 3 co-existing /24s in that domain I may >go crazy.... > >I've cleaned up a lot of poor host and network management and it's >amazing how much a difference the hardware operates without the hacks. > >Jared Mauch > >On Jul 6, 2012, at 8:51 PM, Ben Aitchison <b...@meh.net.nz> wrote: > >> Routing loops, incorrect >> subnet masks. (like when people stick a /24 netmask on a /27 then >>can't reach another >> adjacent /27) > >We had a pair of diversely located systems operate for about 18 months >with misconfigured gateway addresses. Proxy ARP kept everything on an >even keel until one of the systems failed and the traffic routed to the >remaining system. I arrived on the call in time to hear the sys admins >saying that they had exceeded the maximum number of ARP entries and were >going to expand the table :(