From owner-freebsd-net Fri Nov 10 7: 7:44 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from css-1.cs.iastate.edu (css-1.cs.iastate.edu [129.186.3.24]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D12E037B479 for ; Fri, 10 Nov 2000 07:07:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from popeye.cs.iastate.edu (ghelmer@popeye.cs.iastate.edu [129.186.3.4]) by css-1.cs.iastate.edu (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id JAA16241 for ; Fri, 10 Nov 2000 09:07:41 -0600 (CST) Received: from localhost (ghelmer@localhost) by popeye.cs.iastate.edu (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id JAA10092 for ; Fri, 10 Nov 2000 09:07:39 -0600 (CST) X-Authentication-Warning: popeye.cs.iastate.edu: ghelmer owned process doing -bs Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 09:07:39 -0600 (CST) From: Guy Helmer To: net@freebsd.org Subject: "arp: XX is on xx0 but got reply from YY on yy0" message Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org I'm working with a situation where a machine will have two interfaces on the same Ethernet segment. One interface does not have an IP address and is in promiscuous mode to listen to the segment; the other interface has an IP address and is running normally. The kernel logs a lot of "arp: XX is on xx0 but got reply from YY on yy0" messages. Questions also appear on the FreeBSD lists asking about this message when people have multiple interfaces in different IP subnets on the same wire. From reading the source in for in_arpinput() in /sys/netinet/if_ether.c, it appears that the kernel just logs this message and harmlessly tosses the packet. If this *is* harmless, would it be OK to make the log message conditional on a sysctl toggle? Guy Guy Helmer, Ph.D. Candidate, Iowa State University Dept. of Computer Science Research Assistant, Dept. of Computer Science --- ghelmer@cs.iastate.edu http://www.cs.iastate.edu/~ghelmer To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message