On Sun, 17 Aug 2003 22:31:18 -0700
"David S. Miller" [off-list ref] wrote:

On Mon, 18 Aug 2003 00:48:49 +0200
Willy Tarreau [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Sun, Aug 17, 2003 at 06:24:06PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
 

quoted

So stick the address on eth0 not on lo since its not a loopback but an
eth0 address, then use arpfilter so you don't arp for the invalid magic
shared IP address, or NAT it, or it may work to do

         ip route add nexthop-addr src my-virtual-addr dev eth0 scope
         local onlink ip route add default src my-virtual-addr via
         nexthop-addr dev eth0 scope global

 
I have a case where this doesn't work

Replying again... Alan does mention in the paragraph you've quoted
to use arpfilter, which works for every case imaginable.

The facilities to solve these problems are there, people simply
don't want to use them.

It would be probably a good thing if anybody ever found a _positive_ scenario
where your view of the arp-world has _advantages_ compared to what the vast
majority of people I ever talked to sees as _expected_ behaviour...
(Please don't argue that my "vast majority" is not necessarily _the_ vast
majority, because that is true for merely every human being on this planet and
beyond)
I mean everybody is willing to follow you if you could say: "look at these type
of wide-spread operations and notice the positive (config shortening or
whatever) influence of the current default behaviour."
Can you please give us a striking example of a widespread application where
current behaviour is a requirement or at least a very positive thing?

Regards,
Stephan