Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2016 13:32:16 +0100 From: Matthew Seaman <matthew@FreeBSD.org> To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Problem with VLAN config and traffic after 10.1-R -> 10.3-R-p5 Upgrade? Message-ID: <e219551b-b5fe-8fba-f705-492634b7ecf1@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <2033B3FC769B74294656A089@[10.12.30.106]> References: <2ED5D9FEB55641BF734C14F3@[10.12.30.106]> <2033B3FC769B74294656A089@[10.12.30.106]>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --bHMoBvKKKshEQJIhVxvQQQaNHEV0I5i02 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="NSjAGd75kt2mS6xGBGgCoQLiA5FeVL52X" From: Matthew Seaman <matthew@freebsd.org> To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Message-ID: <e219551b-b5fe-8fba-f705-492634b7ecf1@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Problem with VLAN config and traffic after 10.1-R -> 10.3-R-p5 Upgrade? References: <2ED5D9FEB55641BF734C14F3@[10.12.30.106]> <2033B3FC769B74294656A089@[10.12.30.106]> In-Reply-To: <2033B3FC769B74294656A089@[10.12.30.106]> --NSjAGd75kt2mS6xGBGgCoQLiA5FeVL52X Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 06/23/16 13:14, Karl Pielorz wrote: >=20 > --On 23 June 2016 11:53 +0100 Karl Pielorz <kpielorz_lst@tdx.co.uk> wro= te: >=20 >> This gets increasingly weird if I run tcpdump on the 10.3 box. The act= of >> running 'tcpdump -i lagg1.30 -n' actually fixes the problem: >=20 > As a follow up - running 'ifconfig lagg1 promisc' fixes the issue as > well (as you'd kind of expect if tcpdump does while it's running). >=20 > I don't know if that's a good idea / workaround for now? I use a similar config with vlans over lagg. While I haven't seen exactly your problem, I did see one instance of the vlan interface coming up with an all-zero MAC address (out of about 10 systems upgraded to 10.3-RELEASE so far). See PR207701 -- my workaround was to explicitly set a MAC address for the vlan i/f. We're configuring the vlan interfaces slightly differently so that they end up with a name like 'vlan123' rather than 'lagg0.123' -- if that difference is significant then it maybe gives you an alternate workaround to running your interfaces promiscuously. Cheers, Matthew --NSjAGd75kt2mS6xGBGgCoQLiA5FeVL52X-- --bHMoBvKKKshEQJIhVxvQQQaNHEV0I5i02 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJXa9bQAAoJEABRPxDgqeTnVqsP+wWrcTctSxQ5xVMQsCTln664 tvHGgtQxnVGpN5WrxbrKCJQ49XaGoLx6v8HyKXQHE6My94huvW193M8VDYaYVVQx e51cr5i6+Z7wgkJVibBOi1/lOYxfz1lv9Nkt4+pe+laa31sntq7snVhlY7g8VNef LF98oKaYFiYrwzhmc75l68IqdMmzSfj03g3Pk967kza+6ChwmXgNfWNpWa5mJobV kJIl8xyQd9PqrHufaKvkD3jxHdP+wEcZnbQEMxXUYq6r1zd5neNn450Jg6jSGy9c 3x89E8XONtP2WXp9zM0VkZDU2E7NlT6Kjn9NWOnhQDEJ0V6vmxY9P4B0mTy/XmSz 2+dVefRY1K/GBXSsc9696ARmEbqrqyu+38GVLnMoHGFSz2iteZdxifqE0zUezMgg LJOwYR7TkP9SDG7xIGabFxWE27TxGOm7NJkvtQEstLg5NHITKgnNgJcVuZGot3d6 /wXNmQAoYZKH48zBYtP/qWzuo86DkTYF4VMkdF/ASL0BolwpXQTH4kgyoyxxYZZ6 xVtJBlY1Cb05Wtw3Ruh4h6AhGL7SYAX4advnIMQ6dXT8XKtOybZ1d6wV8hP3Az6q GNIyTZYvjmgbw++pjBaOAbqdbdG4esNuRBBG4u3t44fBzsXLxftHjgW1wkhyiil8 yVF0+EobYm3OCuepI1vI =3F4A -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --bHMoBvKKKshEQJIhVxvQQQaNHEV0I5i02--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?e219551b-b5fe-8fba-f705-492634b7ecf1>