From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Aug 9 13:23:42 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE7721065673 for ; Sat, 9 Aug 2008 13:23:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kes-kes@yandex.ru) Received: from webmail24.yandex.ru (webmail24.yandex.ru [213.180.223.150]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76CAF8FC22 for ; Sat, 9 Aug 2008 13:23:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kes-kes@yandex.ru) Received: from YAMAIL (webmail24) by mail.yandex.ru id S5963785AbYHINXc for ; Sat, 9 Aug 2008 17:23:32 +0400 X-Yandex-Spam: 1 Received: from [92.113.14.156] ([92.113.14.156]) by mail.yandex.ru with HTTP; Sat, 09 Aug 2008 17:23:32 +0400 From: KES To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <358831218288212@webmail24.yandex.ru> Date: Sat, 09 Aug 2008 17:23:32 +0400 X-Mailer: Yamail [ http://yandex.ru ] 5.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain Subject: Fwd: IMPORTANT! Network is unreachable X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 09 Aug 2008 13:23:43 -0000 09.08.08, 16:22, "Matthew Seaman" : > Andrew Snow wrote: > > > > Usually if there is more than IP in a given subnet on an interface, you > > give it a /32 netmask. Only the first IP in a subnet should have the > > full netmask. > > > > So your example should look like this: > > > > > > inet 10.11.16.14 netmask 0xffffff00 broadcast 10.11.16.255 > > inet 10.11.16.9 netmask 0xffffffff broadcast 10.11.16.9 > /32 netmasks for 2nd and subsequent IP alias addresses used to be > mandatory and are arguably more correct, but nowadays you can use > the actual netmask for the network instead. Was fixed a year or > two ago. It's a wetware compatibility thing -- other unixoid OSes > never had the /32 netmask requirement, and it kept tripping people up > when swapping between OSes. > Unfortunately I can't say exactly what the problem the OP is experiencing > is due to, but the way routes are appearing and disappearing on a 5 > minute timescale does suggest dynamic routing problems to me. As a > work-around, if the OP wanted to override the information routed gets > from the network, then he could use /etc/gateways to have the local > routed append some static routes to the routing table -- see routed(8) > for the gory details. Losing a route for a directly attached network > looks like a bug to me though. > Cheers, > Matthew > > inet 10.11.16.14 netmask 0xffffff00 broadcast 10.11.16.255 > > inet 10.11.16.9 netmask 0xffffffff broadcast 10.11.16.9 /24 mask on each IPs on same interfaces is working fine on FreeBSD 6.3 So I do not think that problem is with the network mask. Because of even ping 10.11.16.14 returns network is unreachable! Now when I upgraded to v7 I see trouble described earlier. So this is must be counted as BUG of v7 5min period is seen without routed. With routed I get next picture: start routed: network is unreachable stop routed: network still unreacheable start routed: network is reachable stop routed: network is reacheable start routed: network is unreachable again The thing which is very interesting is: Why period is 5 min?