Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 20:51:56 -0500 From: James <haesu@towardex.com> To: Martin Eugen <martin.eugen@gmail.com>, freebsd-net@freebsd.org, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: resolving routes externally Message-ID: <20041124015156.GA33719@scylla.towardex.com> In-Reply-To: <20041124014919.GA9396@scylla.towardex.com> References: <966ba91e04112301052fed8d6b@mail.gmail.com> <20041123183646.GB733@empiric.icir.org> <20041124014919.GA9396@scylla.towardex.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Nov 23, 2004 at 08:49:19PM -0500, James wrote: > On Tue, Nov 23, 2004 at 10:36:46AM -0800, Bruce M Simpson wrote: > [ snip ] > > > > If I understand correctly, you want the kernel to queue packets until > > layer 2 address resolution is complete. Right now we don't do this. If > > there is no route to a destination, packets will be dropped. > > The KAME ipv6 code does this for v6 neighbor discovery (which is not > arp yes..). Martin, nd6_output() in netinet6/nd6.c should be helpful > if you want to look. RFC requires routers to queue packets up during > layer 2 resolution process (which is why in IPv6 when destination > host is down you see !A with huge latency -- i.e. 3400ms due to > queueing by the router[1]). Err my bad. I meant 'latest packet' (like in arp resolution) -J -- James Jun TowardEX Technologies, Inc. Technical Lead Boston IPv4/IPv6 Web Hosting, Colocation and james@towardex.com Network design/consulting & configuration services cell: 1(978)-394-2867 web: http://www.towardex.com , noc: www.twdx.net _______________________________________________ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20041124015156.GA33719>