From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Nov 19 07:02:37 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC0FC16A4CE for ; Wed, 19 Nov 2003 07:02:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx.lek.ru (mx.lek.ru [80.87.192.4]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52A6843FDF for ; Wed, 19 Nov 2003 07:02:33 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from iliah@lek.ru) Received: from mailnull by mx.lek.ru with LEKTELECOM-spam-scanned (Exim 4.20) id 1AMTqh-0006yc-Q5 for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Wed, 19 Nov 2003 18:02:31 +0300 Received: from drweb by mx.lek.ru with drweb-scanned (Exim 4.20) id 1AMTqh-0006yY-Oq for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Wed, 19 Nov 2003 18:02:31 +0300 Received: from kadaver.lek.ru ([80.87.192.2] helo=lek.ru) by mx.lek.ru with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AMTqh-0006vT-Ml for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Wed, 19 Nov 2003 18:02:31 +0300 Message-ID: <3FBB85F7.8010602@lek.ru> Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 18:02:15 +0300 From: "Ilya V. Serov" Organization: LEK TELECOM Co. User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i386; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, ru MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on mx.lek.ru X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=2.60 X-Spam-Level: Subject: Question abt arp in 5.1-RELEASE X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 15:02:38 -0000 Hello dear all. I've got a curious thing with FBS 5.1-RELEASE, concerning arp requests/reply. I have a LAN, connected to Internet through CISCO router. Recently I had to move one ip address inside my LAN from a 4.8 box to a 5.1 box without a reboot (ifconfig ...). After this I had discovered that CISCO continue sending packets to old MAC address (to 4.8). After an investigation of the problem I discovered, thet CISCO had not "forgotten" the old MAC. If ip is being moved from 4.8 box to 4.8 box this effect fanishes. Did anyone get similar problems? Is it a feature or a bug in 5.1, or I don't understand something? Great thanks in advance for any support. With respect and kind regards, Ilya V. Serov, St-Petersburg, Russia.