Re: Restructuring ARP cache

[christos%zoulas.com@localhost (Christos Zoulas)]

On Sep 11,  5:41pm, roy%marples.name@localhost (Roy Marples) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: Restructuring ARP cache

| On 11/09/2015 16:52, Christos Zoulas wrote:
| > On a machine that has static address configuration and does not use
| > dhcpcd I have:
| 
| > X.Y.Z.16      A:B:C:f4:e1:80  UHLc        -        -      -  bnx0
| > X.Y.Z.17      A:B:C:15:ca:e4  UHLc        -        -      -  lo0
| > X.Y.Z.18      A:B:C:15:ca:e4  UHLc        -        -      -  lo0
| > X.Y.Z.62      E:F:G:5f:38:fc  UHLc        -        -      -  bnx0
| > 
| > 62 is the gateway, 16 is the interface address and the other two were added
| > by arp. What is the correct behavior? What we have now seems inconsistent.
| 
| Looking purely at the routing table, X.Y.Z.17 and X.Y.Z.18 are addresses
| assigned to a local interface while X.Y.Z.16 and X.Y.Z.62 are addresses
| on an attached network.

| I would also say that this output was from -7, or a -current prior to
| RTF_LOCAL being added.

17 and 18 are aliases where 16 is the address of bnx0 and the 62 is the
router address. This is current before the RTF_LOCAL changes (circa january
2015).

The question still stands, which interface do llinfo entries logically
belong to?

christos