From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Oskar Andreasson Subject: RFC1812 and CLUSTERIP Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2006 14:05:18 +0200 Message-ID: <1161777918.8705.63.camel@LAPTOP4.MSHOME> Reply-To: oan@frozentux.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-8o1C0odqOLItOetGmbJF" Return-path: To: netfilter-devel@lists.netfilter.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: netfilter-devel-bounces@lists.netfilter.org Errors-To: netfilter-devel-bounces@lists.netfilter.org List-Id: netfilter-devel.vger.kernel.org --=-8o1C0odqOLItOetGmbJF Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi all again, I've snowed in on the CLUSTERIP target to some extent, and I am still figuring it out to some extent.=20 One question that came to mind is its use of multicast MAC addresses. Is it really allowed to make use of them in the way that it is right now? =46rom RFC 1812 section 3.3.2: ------ A router MUST not believe any ARP reply that claims that the Link Layer address of another host or router is a broadcast or multicast address. ------ As I understand it, this is exactly what the CLUSTERIP target does?=20 Behaves as if a single host has a multicast address? --=20 Oskar Andreasson www.frozentux.net --=-8o1C0odqOLItOetGmbJF Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBFP1L+GadwPDPpB60RApezAJ4rRYS48EZxK+1bYMEs8HEcKZmVYACeJu7T ppz9DmtnRhvqDOWcgGP4jeo= =Qx6a -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-8o1C0odqOLItOetGmbJF--