Re: address translation
- From: peng.kyo@xxxxxxxxx (J. Peng)
- Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2008 16:11:17 +0800
On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 4:03 PM, John W. Krahn <krahnj@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
So 0xffffffff would indicate a network with no hosts on it and thus it
is not a valid netmask.
yup, but sometime we need a 255.255.255.255 netmask to forbit the host
don't reply to any ARP requests.
for example, you have the realservers behind the LVS, if the LVS is
running on DR or Tunning mode, you need to bind the VIP on realservers
and let the hosts don't reply any arp requests to that VIP. Sorry if I
have let people confused.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: address translation
- From: J. Peng
- Re: address translation
- References:
- address translation
- From: J. Peng
- Re: address translation
- From: John W. Krahn
- Re: address translation
- From: J. Peng
- Re: address translation
- From: John W. Krahn
- address translation
- Prev by Date: Re: address translation
- Next by Date: Re: address translation
- Previous by thread: Re: address translation
- Next by thread: Re: address translation
- Index(es):