Re: Routing protocols

From: Michel Arboi (mikhailat_private)
Date: Mon Sep 01 2003 - 15:35:13 PDT

  • Next message: Pavel Kankovsky: "Re: Routing protocols"

    Pavel Kankovsky <peakat_private> writes:
    
    >> > Perhaps the infamous "link local" 169.254.0.0/16?
    
    > A host can pick an address from this block and use it to talk to other
    > hosts on the same LAN (that have picked their own address of this
    > kind).
    
    Just curious: how do they avoid address clashes? Just rely on chance?
    
    > A nice property of these addresses (in the context of RIP testing) is that
    > they are not supposed to be routable.
    
    Maybe that could be a second test: if the router accept such address,
    this means that it is really misconfigured?
    
    > The bogus route should time out in a few minutes
    
    It is disabled after two minutes by routed (*) on Linux Gentoo, and
    removed ~ 30 seconds later. (*) from net-misc/netkit-routed-0.17-r3
    But if there is a loop in the network, there is a risk that the bogus
    route will go round for a while, no?
    
    > I am not sure explicit removal will make it disappear considerably
    > sooner
    
    It is instantly disabled. But this may be inefficient if there is a
    network loop :-\
    
    -- 
    arboiat_private	http://arboi.da.ru
    FAQNOPI de fr.comp.securite http://faqnopi.da.ru/
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon Sep 01 2003 - 15:35:38 PDT