Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 13:10:20 PDT From: Bill Fenner <fenner@parc.xerox.com> To: michael butler <imb@scgt.oz.au> Cc: julian@whistle.com (Julian Elischer), hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Annoying artifact of the routing code Message-ID: <96Oct10.131026pdt.177476@crevenia.parc.xerox.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 10 Oct 1996 01:37:58 PDT." <199610100838.SAA19800@asstdc.scgt.oz.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <199610100838.SAA19800@asstdc.scgt.oz.au>you write: >... invalidate any >cached arp entries (held by others) for the old address by means of some >broadcast on the ether concerned. Is such an arp packet defined or is it a >'Cisco special' ? If it is a 'standard' mechanism, why don't we use it in >such cases ? We do, if you "tcpdump arp" while changing your address you will notice an arp packet being broadcasted. I think Julian was talking about something more subtle, where packets get sent with an incorrect source address. Bill
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?96Oct10.131026pdt.177476>