Date: Thu, 21 Dec 1995 09:42:09 -0700 From: Nate Williams <nate@rocky.sri.MT.net> To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.tfs.com> Cc: Nate Williams <nate@rocky.sri.MT.net>, joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de (Joerg Wunsch), hackers@freebsd.org, isp@freebsd.org Subject: Re: BSD networking code guru needed? Message-ID: <199512211642.JAA02865@rocky.sri.MT.net> In-Reply-To: <5392.819562490@critter.tfs.com> References: <199512211610.JAA02765@rocky.sri.MT.net> <5392.819562490@critter.tfs.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > > I stopped using routed and made static routes, and have had no > > > problems since. > > > > Unfortunately, that's not a solution given that the boxes can exist on > > the local ethernet and come in via PPP (portables are great fun). > > No, but it's probably something we can use as a data-point to find out > what's going on. > > The thing I don't like is that packets get routed counter to what > "netstat -rna" & "arp -a" reports. In my case packets were sent > out a wrong interface even. So we are talking about some pointer > which ends up pointing to the wrong arp-entry I think. Hmm, I'm not seeing that problem here. What I'm seeing is it's not recognizing the the arp entries are for the same host. Here's the output of netstat -ra: Internet: Destination Gateway Flags Refs Use Netif Expire default gateway UGSc 0 0 de0 localhost localhost UH 1 2 lo0 204.182.243 link#2 UC 1 0 gateway 0:0:c0:50:b9:a UHLW 2 142 de0 1150 rocky 8:0:20:12:55:3e UHLW 4 6066 de0 1149 fly 8:0:20:23:73:e3 UHLW 1 67 de0 408 trout gateway UGH 1 2335 de0 moth localhost UGHS 0 0 lo0 ws1 link#2 UHLW 0 1 ws1.sri.MT.net 0:80:48:e8:27:63 ULS2c 0 0 de0 ws1 0:80:48:e8:27:63 UHLS2 0 0 de0 BASE-ADDRESS.MCA link#2 UCS 0 0 Note the three entries for ws1. And now, arp -a. moth:/usr/src/usr.sbin/pppd % arp -a gateway.sri.MT.net (204.182.243.1) at 0:0:c0:50:b9:a rocky.sri.MT.net (204.182.243.10) at 8:0:20:12:55:3e fly.sri.MT.net (204.182.243.11) at 8:0:20:23:73:e3 ws1.sri.MT.net (204.182.243.100) at (incomplete) ws1.sri.MT.net (204.182.243.100) at 0:80:48:e8:27:63 permanent published ws1.sri.MT.net (204.182.243.100) at 0:80:48:e8:27:63 permanent published (proxy only) I'm not sure about the flags in the routing protocol, but doesn't the routing protocol sort via the destination address? Nate
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199512211642.JAA02865>