Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 08:28:48 -0400 From: Kim Culhan <w8hdkim@gmail.com> To: Monthadar Al Jaberi <monthadar@gmail.com> Cc: Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@freebsd.org>, freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Interfaces connected by bridge(4) do not pass arp replies Message-ID: <CAKZxVQX6zA0TpVMVT8gNU55AnfAO1wqVVsUeaEeEpwLoHKV5ag@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CA%2BsBSoKoz-4CntTU_pxwS%2BzynmvKjpM1cKWB%2BthhUNj4%2B-X6iw@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAKZxVQVXptkzS-hisKRmaooFaqgrHx7nOouO3Uj4vxuTBqkhTg@mail.gmail.com> <CA%2BsBSo%2BQy70cLL97KY8BE9L4GR2cwzhLTe6XP_Pe1Qsr8Xa7mQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAKZxVQXaZy9H2QR4uz0XzZ%2BmCyX-27CVBQEeFGH=J4G5EtvPXg@mail.gmail.com> <CA%2BsBSoKmnQAW1WoKnrDzNje5SF1wooW0JVdxb57JjyYpEeFQpA@mail.gmail.com> <CAKZxVQUBC9m0WjQ-n7%2BoJo0=0_DEMU0bnXopsNYqYdgxq2xE0g@mail.gmail.com> <20121030121924.GD70741@FreeBSD.org> <CAKZxVQWOojNbZ58k4tW4O-5%2BiCZFQD_N6%2BB%2BCYnnNDR2rng-Qg@mail.gmail.com> <CA%2BsBSoKoz-4CntTU_pxwS%2BzynmvKjpM1cKWB%2BthhUNj4%2B-X6iw@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 4:41 AM, Monthadar Al Jaberi <monthadar@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 2:29 PM, Kim Culhan <w8hdkim@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 8:19 AM, Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@freebsd.org> wrote: >>> Kim, >>> >>> On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 05:59:04PM -0400, Kim Culhan wrote: >>> K> >> What svn revision of FreeBSD -current are you running? >>> K> > >>> K> > FreeBSD head r238604. >>> K> >>> K> I should have mentioned earlier this is with r242126, there have been >>> K> some changes >>> K> to the network code since 238604, maybe that is why you don't have this problem. >>> >>> If you can do binary search, that may be valuable. >>> >>> -- >>> Totus tuus, Glebius. >> >> Ok I can begin that process, Monthadar since you have an earlier >> version can you try >> a test: >> >> From a machine on one of your 2 interfaces, can you ping a machine on >> the other interface? > > Yes > >> >> Do you see the MAC for a machine on the other interface in the arp table? > > Yes > >> >> When this problem is present, it is possible to reach the router and >> out to the internet >> (if it is routed that way) but in the case of the wireless interface, >> for example, you cannot >> reach a machine on the wired interface. >> >> The interfaces here: >> >> bridge0: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> metric 0 mtu 1500 >> ether 02:f3:8d:7d:04:00 >> inet 10.0.0.1 netmask 0xffffff00 broadcast 10.0.0.255 >> nd6 options=29<PERFORMNUD,IFDISABLED,AUTO_LINKLOCAL> >> id 00:00:00:00:00:00 priority 32768 hellotime 2 fwddelay 15 >> maxage 20 holdcnt 6 proto rstp maxaddr 2000 timeout 1200 >> root id 00:00:00:00:00:00 priority 32768 ifcost 0 port 0 >> member: msk0 flags=143<LEARNING,DISCOVER,AUTOEDGE,AUTOPTP> >> ifmaxaddr 0 port 2 priority 128 path cost 55 >> member: em0 flags=143<LEARNING,DISCOVER,AUTOEDGE,AUTOPTP> >> ifmaxaddr 0 port 1 priority 128 path cost 2000000 >> member: wlan1 flags=143<LEARNING,DISCOVER,AUTOEDGE,AUTOPTP> >> ifmaxaddr 0 port 11 priority 128 path cost 33333 >> >> msk0: flags=8943<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,PROMISC,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> >> metric 0 mtu 1500 >> options=c0019<RXCSUM,VLAN_MTU,VLAN_HWTAGGING,VLAN_HWTSO,LINKSTATE> >> ether 00:1e:8c:0a:50:e2 >> inet6 fe80::21e:8cff:fe0a:50e2%msk0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x2 >> nd6 options=29<PERFORMNUD,IFDISABLED,AUTO_LINKLOCAL> >> media: Ethernet autoselect (1000baseT <full-duplex>) >> status: active >> >> em0: flags=8943<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,PROMISC,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> metric >> 0 mtu 1500 >> options=2098<VLAN_MTU,VLAN_HWTAGGING,VLAN_HWCSUM,WOL_MAGIC> >> ether 00:0e:0c:7f:cf:02 >> inet6 fe80::20e:cff:fe7f:cf02%em0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x1 >> nd6 options=29<PERFORMNUD,IFDISABLED,AUTO_LINKLOCAL> >> media: Ethernet autoselect (1000baseT <full-duplex>) >> status: active >> >> In rc.conf the bridge is created with: >> >> ifconfig_bridge0="inet 10.0.0.1 netmask 255.255.255.0 addm wlan1 addm >> em0 addm msk0 up" > > I create the bridge the same way as you. Thanks for that, so far the working revision has been found in r240826. Would anyone have a suggestion for a revision to try next ? thanks -kim
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAKZxVQX6zA0TpVMVT8gNU55AnfAO1wqVVsUeaEeEpwLoHKV5ag>