In March 1982, the US Department of Defense decided on the Internet Protocol Suite (TCP/IP) as the standard for all military computer networking. So people are used to that implementation, and would be confused to see something different.Īll methods was sourced from or, is licensed under cc by-sa 2.5, cc by-sa 3.0 and cc by-sa 4.Internet Protocol version 4 is described in IETF publication RFC 791 (September 1981), replacing an earlier definition of January 1980 (RFC 760). Where the loopback network is supported, it has generally been interpreted in the same way as Linux has. The standard does not clarify this point. maybe it could be legal to use them to construct more complex virtual networks, if you never let them touch a physical network. Maybe the standard requirement means something else. Because they would no longer work as loopback addresses. to communicate between a docker container and a docker host. This means that it is not legal to use them e.g. More specifically, the IPv4 standard could reasonably be interpreted as requiring all the loopback addresses to behave as loopbacks. a second network for guest Wi-Fi access, which is firewalled from your main network. This helps when you want to configure multiple subnets – e.g.
Your home router almost certainly uses 192.168.0.* or 192.168.1.* by default. Splitting 192.168.*.* into subnets is absolutely the most common way of using it. So, it is clear it was not used very much. Because the authors did not find any good reasons for having a whole loopback network (let alone 2^24 such addresses). In IPv6, you only get one loopback address ::1.
#Standard loopback address software#
But I am suspicious of any software that relies on splitting 127.*.*.*. If private IP address can work like a loopback address,Ĭan lo be assigned a prviate instead of loopback IP address? Virtual devices are listed in /sys/devices/virtual/. All it means is they are not provided by a hardware device. (They can be made to work in any way you want, but that’s for networking experts and people who design systems such as Istio with Envoy, which uses an interesting loopback trick for multi-cluster setups.) No, private IP addresses don’t work like a loopback address. Such interfaces are generally used to communicate with containers or VMs, which are separate (from a networking perspective, which is what concerns us here) from the local host. Yes, they don’t correspond to physical network interfaces.īecause they are not loopback interfaces. The loopback network is special in that by default, all 127.x.x.x addresses correspond to the local host. Thus docker0 is on the 172.17.x.x network (and can talk to any 172.17.x.x endpoint in the same layer 2 network), lo is on the 127.x.x.x network, virbr0 is on the network (and can talk to any endpoint in the same layer 2 network), and wlx8 is on the 192.168.1.x network (I’ll let you fill in), and they’re all separate. What constitutes a “network” (a set of endpoints which are reachable without the help of routers) is determined by the netmask here. If you found the post helpful (or not), leave a comment & I’ll get back to you as soon as possible. Please note that all the answers may not help you solve the issue immediately. Thank you for visiting the Q&A section on Magenaut. TX errors 0 dropped 0 overruns 0 carrier 0 collisions 0 Are they often split into several smaller networks, as in the example ( wlx8 and virbr0)? Do they always form a network instead of being split into several smaller networks, as in the example?ġ92.168.*.* is a range of private IP addresses. If private IP address can work like a loopback address, can lo be assigned a prviate instead of loopback IP address? Why are docker0 and virbr0 assigned private not loopback IP address?
Are docker0, lo and virbr0 are virtual network interfaces?
0 kommentar(er)
