From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Albert Pretorius Subject: Re: IPV6 loopback bound socket succeeds connecting to remote host Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2010 07:45:48 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <616589.97517.qm@web29017.mail.ird.yahoo.com> References: <4CF604DB.8000302@cn.fujitsu.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, "yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org >> YOSHIFUJI Hideaki" , David Miller , pekkas@netcore.fi, jmorris@namei.org To: Shan Wei Return-path: Received: from nm18.bullet.mail.ird.yahoo.com ([77.238.189.71]:20485 "HELO nm18.bullet.mail.ird.yahoo.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1752687Ab0LBHpu convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Dec 2010 02:45:50 -0500 In-Reply-To: <4CF604DB.8000302@cn.fujitsu.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hi --- On Wed, 1/12/10, Shan Wei wrote: > I think it make nonsense to translate data between loopback > device and other e.g. eth0 device in same machine. I agree, RFC4291 makes it clear for IPV6 that no interface should accept traffic from loopback, I should not have tried to make it behave like IPV4. I can not find an equivalent statement for IPV4 though, all I could find is this from RFC3330: 127.0.0.0/8 - This block is assigned for use as the Internet host loopback address. A datagram sent by a higher level protocol to an address anywhere within this block should loop back inside the host. This is ordinarily implemented using only 127.0.0.1/32 for loopback, but no addresses within this block should ever appear on any network anywhere [RFC1700, page 5]. Do you perhaps know? thank you, Albert Pretorius