RE: Do you know the TCP stack? (127.x.x.x routing)
From: Steve Iribarne
Date: Mon Mar 07 2005 - 13:02:28 EST
-> However, using these addresses is a BAD BAD idea. A lot of other
-> machines will be expecting 127.x to mean something speacial. I dont
-> think you should ask the poster for wages, he will suffer enough with
-> ARPs etc ;->
Don't want to start an entire, "why would you do this" here, however,
-> What is so wrong with RFC198 addresses??
Really RFC1918 you mean...
Well if your product is placed behind a nat'd network, MOST if not ALL
nat'd network addresses on the "inside" use the RFC1918 address space.
So I have this working in my products now. I had to do something a bit
different in that I want a "special" 127.xx.xx.xx range to be sent out
on the wire. So here is what I did.
1. Make the "lo" interface 127.0.0.1/24 instead of 127.0.0.1/8
2. Change handing in an arp receive function.
3. Change handling in arptx.
4. And there was something else I had to do in route.c. (I can find
it, but I can't remember off hand what it was).
I also did this with the 2.6.10 kernel. However, there are friends that
I have given this to that have it working on 2.4 based kernels.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html