Large scale NAT with PF - some weird problem

[Milan Obuch]

On Mon, 29 Jun 2015 11:29:32 +0200
Daniel Hartmeier <daniel at benzedrine.ch> wrote:

> On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 10:52:01AM +0200, Milan Obuch wrote:
> 
> > Does this answerred your question fully or something more would be
> > usefull?
> 
> How are you doing ARP?
>
> You're not assigning every address on x.y.26.0/23 as an alias, are
> you?
> 
> So who answers ARP requests of the upstream router?

There is no ARP on routed address block.

In cisco speak, there is just

ip route x.y.24.0 255.255.252.0 x.y.3.19

statement and that's it. Nothing more. Whole address range from
x.y.24.0 to x.y.27.254 is routed here as it should be. For something
like this ARP would be really evil solution.

Milan