From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) Subject: Re: [RFC] arp announce, arp_proxy and windows ip conflict verification Date: Sat, 04 Jul 2009 16:47:31 -0700 Message-ID: References: <200907030246.18054.denys@visp.net.lb> <200907041803.25436.denys@visp.net.lb> <200907050100.08148.denys@visp.net.lb> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: David Miller , netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Denys Fedoryschenko Return-path: Received: from out01.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.231]:50643 "EHLO out01.mta.xmission.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752704AbZGDXrc (ORCPT ); Sat, 4 Jul 2009 19:47:32 -0400 In-Reply-To: <200907050100.08148.denys@visp.net.lb> (Denys Fedoryschenko's message of "Sun\, 5 Jul 2009 01\:00\:08 +0300") Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Denys Fedoryschenko writes: > On Sunday 05 July 2009 00:57:32 Eric W. Biederman wrote: >> >> How can that possibly be a correct network configuration? >> >> Eric > It is a problem to have different networks, who doesn't communicate one with > each other, in same ethernet segment? > > Does it violate anything? The point of the internet protocol is communications between networks. Setting up a router to route traffic in and off of a network and not telling it about one of the networks on your ethernet segment is at the least very peculiar. Eric