From: Arthur van Leeuwen <arthurvl@sci.kun.nl>
To: lartc@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [LARTC] Unnumbered
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2001 09:00:03 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <marc-lartc-99320061519832@msgid-missing> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <marc-lartc-99319611106908@msgid-missing>
On Fri, 22 Jun 2001, M.F. PSIkappa wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Jun 2001, Arthur van Leeuwen wrote:
>
> > > > > it's posibility to make something similar to Cisco unnumber on Linux ?
> > > > > E. g.
> > > > > interface Serial0
> > > > > ip unnumbered Ethernet0
> > > > > I don't want to assign to interface private IP.
> > > >
> > > > If I understand the ip unnumbered command correctly it allows you to share a
> > > > single IP address on multiple interfaces. This is trivial on Linux: just add
> > > > the same IP address to each of the interfaces with ip addr add
> > > >
> > > > The routing effects I cannot correctly comment on, as I'm not sufficiently
> > > > versed in IOS to fully grasp the effects of ip unnumbered
> > >
> > > No, it's incorrect, unnumberd allow you to connect 2 router without IP
> > > adresses.
> > >
> > > 192.168.0.1/24 [cisco]unnumbered-----unnumberd[cisco] 192.168.2.1/24
> > >
> > > It's special case of point-to-point connection. In linux if I make
> > > point-to-point connection I have to assign any IP on both endpoint of
> > > connection.
> >
> > What is the difference with
> >
> > 192.168.0.1/24 [linux] 192.168.0.1 ------- 192.168.2.1 [linux] 192.168.2.1/24
> >
> > if I may be so bold to ask? Yes, the routing effects may be different, and I
> > mentioned that might be a problem, but the unnumbered thing looks like a
> > cisco-specific hack...
>
> Difference is in traceroute. Unnumbered is invisible, if I assign IP I see
> it in traceroute, but I can make hack that make this connection invisible,
> but it's rfc break ...
Ah, but iptable's mangle module will let you play around with the TTL field
of packets being forwarded through a linux box. Yes, it takes some more
configuring, but the behaviour can be duplicated. And that is not considered
a hack. Besides, ever heard of masquerading? That is nowhere near RFC
compliance... and should theoretically be impossible, if I'm to believe
Jos Vos (one of the first implementers).
Doei, Arthur.
--
/\ / | arthurvl@sci.kun.nl | Work like you don't need the money
/__\ / | A friend is someone with whom | Love like you have never been hurt
/ \/__ | you can dare to be yourself | Dance like there's nobody watching
_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://ds9a.nl/2.4Routing/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-06-22 9:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-06-22 7:47 [LARTC] Unnumbered M.F. PSIkappa
2001-06-22 8:00 ` Arthur van Leeuwen
2001-06-22 8:31 ` M.F. PSIkappa
2001-06-22 8:34 ` Arthur van Leeuwen
2001-06-22 8:55 ` M.F. PSIkappa
2001-06-22 8:55 ` Jasper Spaans
2001-06-22 8:59 ` Dmytro O. Redchuk
2001-06-22 9:00 ` Arthur van Leeuwen [this message]
2001-06-22 16:37 ` Greg Varga
2001-06-22 16:55 ` Ramin Alidousti
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-99320061519832@msgid-missing \
--to=arthurvl@sci.kun.nl \
--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