difference between "ping -I INTERFACE" and "ping -I IPADDRESS" ?

[Frantisek Hanzlik]

JB wrote:
> Frantisek Hanzlik <franta <at> hanzlici.cz> writes:
> 
>> ...
> 
> Just a wild guess if you want to try.
> 
> Turn off ICMP redirect:
> # echo "0' > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/all/accept_redirects
> # echo "0" > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/all/send_redirects
> 
> Flush arp cache:
> # ip neigh flush all
> 
> Flush the route cache:
> # ip route flush cache
>  
> Now try *separate* entries:
> # ping -n -c 2 -I source_ip target_ip     
> # ping -n -c 2 -I source_if target_ip
> 
> JB

It is the same. My opinion was ping in case of "-I netdev" gets
interface address (when it have only one, as in this case, this should
not be a problem) and things further come in same manner as if I give
"-I IPAddr" But ping behaves somehow else - for exact findings it would
be necessary overview its souce code. Maybe it not specify source IP
address - when I "ping -I eth1 target_ip", then I see at eth1 ARP
requests for target_ip (although it not belong to eth1 network segment).

OTOH: traceroute behaves fine and its syntax is IMO more obvious,
both "traceroute -i eth1 target_ip" and
"traceroute -i source_ip target_ip"
works fine and packets goes thru proper interface. And it can specify
separatelly to which device use and which source address use.

Franta