Re: Can we make NM automatically handle the need for proxy arp?

["Miles Lane" <miles lane gmail com>]

On 8/27/06, Darren Albers <dalbers gmail com> wrote:
> On 8/27/06, Darren Albers <dalbers gmail com> wrote:
> > On 8/27/06, Ted Lemon <mellon fugue com> wrote:
> > > So you configured a valid default route on Windows, and it used a
> > > different route instead?   Or you configured an invalid default route
> > > and it didn't use it?   I'm a bit puzzled by this paragraph, because
> > > my experience is that Windows isn't quite as brain-dead as you're
> > > suggesting here.
> >
> > Correct, I configured a valid route and when I did a arp -a I saw the
> > ip for a device on my other test network associated with the mac of
> > the router.
> >
>
> My apologies it looks like you are right, I replaced my Linksys
> running dd-wrt with some no name 5 year old piece of crap on wednesday
> when my linksys died and it looks like it is causing that behavior.  I
> sniffed the traffic and it looks like the noname router picked up the
> information from the Cisco router and told my box to send traffic
> there.
>
> So maybe Windows isn't brain dead and it is just my router  ;-)
>
> I have a new linksys sitting here and when my wife goes to bed I will
> swap it out and see if the behavior is correct.
>
> So the real question is (and off topic for this list since it isn't NM
> that is causing this) should linux networking treat a bad default
> gateway as no gateway and use proxy-arp?

Firstly, where should this be discussed?  I understand that NM talks
to dhcdbd, which talks to dhclient.  What component should notice
the misconfiguration and which component should then configure
the connection so that it works?

I certainly feel strongly that unless there is an exceptionally strong
reason for not adding the default gateway route, we should do so
automatically and give the user a working network connection.

           Miles