Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2016 08:23:42 -0800 From: Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@FreeBSD.org> To: Michael Butler <imb@protected-networks.net> Cc: Eric van Gyzen <vangyzen@FreeBSD.org>, FreeBSD Current <freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org>, rrs@FreeBSD.org, jtl@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Log spam: Limiting * response from 1 to 200 packets/sec Message-ID: <20161213162342.GO27748@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <3dbb632b-e095-1d34-d97f-132bbf54245a@protected-networks.net> References: <630314dc-e14f-02e7-aa48-4456b0feeef9@protected-networks.net> <689f6fbe-c59f-2e3a-44d6-bc9d19d31bf9@FreeBSD.org> <3dbb632b-e095-1d34-d97f-132bbf54245a@protected-networks.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 11:07:19AM -0500, Michael Butler wrote: M> On 12/13/16 10:48, Eric van Gyzen wrote: M> > On 12/13/2016 09:24, Michael Butler wrote: M> >> Any hints as to why all of my -current equipment is complaining like below. Is M> >> there a sysctl to moderate/turn this off? M> >> M> >> Dec 13 10:00:01 archive kernel: Limiting icmp unreach response from 1 to 200 M> >> packets/sec M> >> Dec 13 10:00:21 archive last message repeated 13 times M> >> Dec 13 10:02:21 archive last message repeated 18 times M> >> Dec 13 10:06:21 archive last message repeated 36 times M> >> Dec 13 10:07:11 archive kernel: Limiting icmp ping response from 1 to 200 M> >> packets/sec M> >> Dec 13 10:07:55 archive kernel: Limiting icmp unreach response from 1 to 200 M> >> packets/sec M> >> Dec 13 10:08:21 archive last message repeated 17 times M> >> Dec 13 10:08:37 archive kernel: Limiting closed port RST response from 4 to 200 M> >> packets/sec M> >> Dec 13 10:09:55 archive kernel: Limiting icmp unreach response from 1 to 200 M> >> packets/sec M> >> Dec 13 10:10:21 archive last message repeated 17 times M> >> Dec 13 10:12:21 archive last message repeated 18 times M> >> Dec 13 10:12:28 archive kernel: Limiting icmp ping response from 1 to 200 M> >> packets/sec M> >> Dec 13 10:13:55 archive kernel: Limiting icmp unreach response from 1 to 200 M> >> packets/sec M> > M> > What Subversion revision are you running? Did this start happening after a M> > recent update? I ask because r309745 was committed a few days ago and might M> > have changed the behavior. M> M> That's consistent with my observations. I was in Australia for a couple M> of weeks and have just updated from SVN r309056 to r309852, Yes, this is our fail. I will take a look today. -- Totus tuus, Glebius.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20161213162342.GO27748>