Linux Advanced Routing and Traffic Control list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jose Celestino <japc@co.sapo.pt>
To: lartc@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [LARTC] Layer jump in Linux?
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2002 23:36:03 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <marc-lartc-101960505930377@msgid-missing> (raw)

First of all sorry if this is not the right list for this question/doubt.

I noticed a while ago that I can ping a machine on a diferent network, with no
IP on that network, if I have a network interface on the same broadcast domain
as that machine's interface if I add a route to that IP through the local IP in
the same broadcast domain.

Did I make myself clear ? :)

Well, what I have is this:

 /--------\
 |        |                           /--------\
 | Linux1 |-- aaa.bbb.ccc.ddd/24 -----| Switch |
 |        |                           \--------/
 \--------/                                |
                                           |
                                   eee.fff.ggg.hhh/24
                                           |
                                      /---------\
                                     |           |
                                     |   Linux2  |
                                     \___________/

(aaa.bbb.ccc.0) != (eee.fff.ggg.0)

Linux1 should not be able to ping Linux2 except through a gw, right?
(They're not on the same network so the packet should go through the
default gw if a less generic route isn't defined, of course)

And the packet should go on until it reached a router/gw with a IP
on the eee.fff.ggg.0/24 net and it would then be delivered to
eee.fff.ggg.hhh.

The problem is that the linux stack seems to completely "short circuit"
from layer 3 to layer 2 if I add a gw to eee.fff.ggg.hhh through
aaa.bbb.ccc.ddd (route add -host eee.fff.ggg.hhh gw aaa.bbb.ccc.ddd);
it issues an arp request regardless if the destination
IP is on the local network or not.

Is this a correct behaviour? Am I missing something?

Note: this only happens between 2 linuxes, I tried between 2 FreeBSDs
but the IP stack behaves diferently. 

TIA.

-- 
Jose Celestino <japc@co.sapo.pt> Systems::SAPO.pt http://www.sapo.pt
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Titanic 1912 / Hindenburg Zeppelin 1937 / Microsoft Windows 2000
OpenBSD claudia 3.0 GENERIC#94 i386
_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/

             reply	other threads:[~2002-04-23 23:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2002-04-23 23:36 Jose Celestino [this message]
2002-04-24 19:21 ` [LARTC] Layer jump in Linux? Julian Anastasov

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=marc-lartc-101960505930377@msgid-missing \
    --to=japc@co.sapo.pt \
    --cc=lartc@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox