Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 29 May 2016 00:30:46 +0000
From:      bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org
To:        freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   [Bug 208001] After turning off the jail does not remove network routes
Message-ID:  <bug-208001-6-t0lTHVP3tG@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-208001-6@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
References:  <bug-208001-6@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D208001

--- Comment #5 from Jamie Gritton <jamie@FreeBSD.org> ---
Yes, of course there are cases where something besides a /32 is appropriate=
 -
that is why jail(8) allows that.  However, as I mentioned it did appear that
you had violated the specification that an alias should be on a non-conflic=
ting
netmask.

The fact remains that I am unable to reproduce your problem.  Perhaps I cou=
ld
if I had your entire configuration - all jails, all other network setup.

jail(8) simply calls ifconfig(8) with "alias" to add IP addresses, and with
"-alias" to remove them - see the output of "jail -vc" and "jail -vr".  The
jail will not be removed if the "ifconfig ... -alias" command fails, which
implies that the command is succeeding.  Unless of course there actually is=
 a
bug in the way jail(8) is running this program.  My guess is the command is
succeeding, but isn't removing some arp entry because the alias when
incorrectly specified when it was created.

If it's clear (from "jail -v") that the correct ifconfig commands are being
run, then this might be considered an ifconfig bug.  If the correct commands
aren't being run, then it could be a jail bug.

--=20
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.=



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-208001-6-t0lTHVP3tG>