From owner-freebsd-hackers  Mon Jan  8 02:23:29 1996
Return-Path: owner-hackers
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id CAA28771
          for hackers-outgoing; Mon, 8 Jan 1996 02:23:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from relay-4.mail.demon.net (relay-4.mail.demon.net [158.152.1.64])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id CAA28755
          for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Mon, 8 Jan 1996 02:23:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from post.demon.co.uk ([158.152.1.72]) by relay-4.mail.demon.net
          id ae14990; 8 Jan 96 10:22 GMT
Received: from wbsmail.zipmail.co.uk ([194.70.221.1]) by relay-3.mail.demon.net
          id aa01049; 8 Jan 96 10:21 GMT
Received: from PhilPC (kiss.demon.co.uk [158.152.97.57]) by wbsmail.zipmail.co.uk (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id KAA21804 for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Mon, 8 Jan 1996 10:23:11 GMT
Message-Id: <199601081023.KAA21804@wbsmail.zipmail.co.uk>
Comments: Authenticated sender is <phil@wbsmail.zipmail.co.uk>
From: Phil Taylor <phil@zipmail.co.uk>
Organization: Lan Systems
To: hackers@freebsd.org
Date: Tue, 8 Jan 1996 10:15:20 +0000
Subject: Losing arp entries...
Reply-to: phil@zipmail.co.uk
Priority: normal
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.23)
Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org
Precedence: bulk

Having read the thread about the proxy arp problem with interest, I 
now have a problem...

I had the proxy arp problem (the previous entry not being deleted 
upon disconnection) some time ago, so as my 16 modems were 
using kernel based pppd and dynamically allocating IP addresses 
I created an arp file that I ran through at boot time (it was 2.0.5R 
and didn't accept the -f option in arp so I fixed that.)

Now I seem to have a problem that arp stops publishing entries in 2.1.0R 
(it loses the pub flag) or it creates another proxy entry with 
{incomplete} which causes quite a number of problems.

Is there a way to TOTALLY disable proxy arp (at least until the bug 
is fixed !!!) so that this problem wont occur. Obviously proxy arp is 
infinately favorouble to static arps but as they seem to be 
(slightly) broken at the moment this seems to be the way to go.

Cheers

Phil

/*   Phil Taylor (phil@zipmail.co.uk)
     LAN Systems - LAN/WAN Specialists */