From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Nov 2 12:57:17 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 462C016A418; Fri, 2 Nov 2007 12:57:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from stefan.lambrev@moneybookers.com) Received: from blah.sun-fish.com (blah.sun-fish.com [217.18.249.150]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F29A313C48A; Fri, 2 Nov 2007 12:57:16 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from stefan.lambrev@moneybookers.com) Received: by blah.sun-fish.com (Postfix, from userid 1002) id BF8071B10EE9; Fri, 2 Nov 2007 13:56:54 +0100 (CET) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on blah.cmotd.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.4 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.2.3 Received: from [10.1.1.3] (unknown [192.168.25.14]) by blah.sun-fish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6991B1B10EE6; Fri, 2 Nov 2007 13:56:50 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <472B1E89.5080006@moneybookers.com> Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 14:56:41 +0200 From: Stefan Lambrev User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.91.2/4660/Fri Nov 2 13:13:54 2007 on blah.cmotd.com X-Virus-Status: Clean Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: rtfree: 0xc741ee88 has 1 refs X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 12:57:17 -0000 Hi, I see rtfree: 0xc741ee88 has 1 refs with freebsd releng_7 (i386) from today. I think it's easy reproducible. What I have is: releng_7 (10.1.1.2) -> default GW (10.1.1.1) on default GW I have route to 10.10.1.1/24 -> 10.1.1.3 so everytime when 10.1.1.2 try to contact someone from 10.10.1.1/24 I see: rtfree: 0xc741ee88 has 1 refs if I add direct route on 10.1.1.2 to 10.10.1.1/24 through 10.1.1.3 the message will go away. Should I ignore this msg for now, or should I expect kernel panic soon? :)