Re: Solaris and lack of loopback routes

From: Jon (warchild@spoofed.org)
Date: 08/06/02


Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2002 12:14:30 -0400
From: Jon <warchild@spoofed.org>
To: Chris Mattingly <chris.mattingly@interpath.net>


(reposted)

On Tue, Jul 30, 2002 at 05:12:45PM -0400, Chris Mattingly wrote:
> On FreeBSD, there is no route for the 127/8 network, but the stack
> actually pays attention to the fact that lo0 has a netmask for the
> entire /8 network, and traffic to any 127 address stays within the lo0
> interface (never shows up on any of the other three physical
> interfaces).
                                                                                                                                 
Just to satisfy my curiousity, I dropped the loopback network route and
changed the netmask of my loopback device to be 255.255.255.0 on my linux
box (I don't have a Solaris box available at the moment). Still, all
traffic bound for the loopback network was sent over the loopback device.
This may be a linux specific feature that I'm not familiar with. Does a
similar test on a Solaris box yield different results?
                                                                                                                                 
> It's a good question as to why Solaris behaves in this manner...
                                                                                                                                 
It's been bothering me on and off for some time now. Interestingly, it
only bothers me when when we get spam bombed and the mail gets old and
moldy in the queue for 4 days...
                                                                                                                                 
-jon