Rick Jones [off-list ref] wrote on 2010/06/11 18:32:20:

Joakim Tjernlund wrote:

quoted

Linux uses the weak host model which makes the IP addresses part of the system
rather than the interface. However consider this:

System A, eth0 connected to the network
# > ifconfig eth0 192.168.1.16
# > ifconfig eth1 192.168.1.17 down

System B
# > ping 192.168.1.17
PING 192.168.1.17 (192.168.1.17) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 192.168.1.17: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.618 ms

Isn't it a bit much to respond on 192.168.1.17 when its interface is down?

As you said at the beginning, the weak end system model presumes the IP address
is part of the system.  Seems to me that means unless one removes the IP address
from the system it is reasonable for the system to continue to respond to that
IP address.  Regardless of what happens to any individual interface.

The weak model doesn't go into such detail, it is assumption/impl. detail
to assume that the ip address still is part of the system even when the interface
is down. One could just as well define interface down as temporarly removing
the IP address from the system too. This makes make much more sense to me and
if you always want the system to answer on a IP adress you make it an IP alias.

Since the current behaviour is a problem to me and routers in general, can
we change this? What is the current usage model which needs it to stay as is?

Now, I wouldn't expect it to continue to respond to 192.168.1.17 through eth1,
but if eth0 is indeed connected to the same broadcast domain, given the
following of the weak end-system model, continuing to respond seems consistent
with enthusiasticaly following the weak end-system model.

Dosnt matter if it is in the same broadcast domain, you can use a bridge
interface or dummy interface too. It will still respond to 192.168.1.17
I can't find a way disable this behaviour, can you?