(Courriels de diversion: <rassoirai@internerez-precautionneras.com> <debâcles@infestera-crissant.com> <rhumatisantes@contrecarrerais-annoterais.com> <oeils-de-boeuf@clones-pelleterie.com> <inversez@platanes-exerceras.com> <rosie@parcellise-ovationnant.com> <piegeais@empressais-deferlait.com> <rougeoyees@alleges-embuer.com> <deshabituions@soustrait-eclatants.com> <concut@vouvoyerent-decousiez.com> )
Salut, Merci, Eric, pour tes traductions, cela m'a bien aidé. Je commence un peu à saturer ; c'est pourquoi j'ose demander un dernier coup de main : 1) En fait, le paragraphe complet : In the bad old days , it used to be possible to instruct the Linux Kernel to perform 'proxy-ARP' for just any subnet. So, to configure a pseudo-bridge, you would have to specify both the proper routes to both sides of the bridge AND create matching proxy-ARP rules. This is bad in that it requires a lot of typing, but also because it easily allows you to make mistakes which make your bridge respond to ARP queries for networks it does not know how to route. 2) When you encounter sites that suffer from this problem, you can disable Path MTU discovery by setting it manually. Koos van den Hout, ??slightly edited??, writes: Promis, craché, juré, après J'AI FINIIIIIIIII. Laurent --------------------------------------------------------------------- Aide sur la liste: <URL:mailto:linux-31-help@CULTe.org>Le CULTe sur le web: <URL:http://www.CULTe.org/>