On Fri, 2008-08-22 at 06:00 +0800, Justin Richards wrote:
> Hi Graf,
> 
> my understanding is inline with yours.  Or at least it is now but I
> still see an anomaly.
> 
> I perhaps didnt describe the problem too well using the 2 conflicting
> behaviours below of two hosts that were apparently configured
> identically.
> 
> And in your dicussion below I am curious as to what would be found in
> the arp table if there was no gateway address configured.
> I guess in this case the host has the choice of either destination
> unreachable or put an arp request on the wire for the ip that is not a
> match with  that hosts netmask.  And then if the router responds the
> packet will be sent.

I don't know what every OS will do in that case, and I also am not sure
if there is an RFC to cover it.

That said, I know my linux boxes, when there is no default gw
configured, immediately respond with a "destination unreachable", I
don't think an ARP request goes out.

In fact (and I might be completely wrong here), I'd personally find that
if a stack sent out an ARP request for a NON local address (an address
that doesn't match the netmask) that would be a sign of a broken stack.
It just doesn't make sense. It's like looking for New York state on a
map of France.

If that's what you're hardware is doing I suppose you'll have to figure
something out.

TTYL

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist