From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org  Thu Sep 22 14:58:33 2016
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org>
Delivered-To: freebsd-net@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 210E7BE508C
 for <freebsd-net@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org>;
 Thu, 22 Sep 2016 14:58:33 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from rysto32@gmail.com)
Received: from mail-io0-x231.google.com (mail-io0-x231.google.com
 [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::231])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits))
 (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com",
 Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK))
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E1E1CB14;
 Thu, 22 Sep 2016 14:58:32 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from rysto32@gmail.com)
Received: by mail-io0-x231.google.com with SMTP id r145so88396374ior.0;
 Thu, 22 Sep 2016 07:58:32 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
 h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to
 :cc; bh=DB4tcFDGOrH2GrjmZ0zo6vUsLq94zuxHg0Nz965DKGE=;
 b=JnRIHsuicd4P5vd+3xBMq7gfFRqM3GfyvL9PHa7Kk8R/+Hqb8uPEcemVpIoHMC3DyZ
 LFbi6vVDu2Q481h7W+g+p2RR/7U6/2ERjEHzCyLXq8gzs8YK+EKLsqktaLxdwtUJyTU8
 rN0T2IsE0Nb/fnPup8Is6WEsWoFgl0ckQelz20KcjLL0A9hnXpMLcxPjqTlVuElMgxqc
 xoSUzKyRmp0AmEVMrMCa/dW+WcqWWWP8KpIHnzvfamj3JkhbrLvmqbaAmRRFx2Cf8xyp
 VhnFfuOLdUi4QdSi0v2jHZSAyPEWsu+zaR9h5U5k44ZAQaWj2rEYzF1vpeDQj9OO9NXE
 9seA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
 h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date
 :message-id:subject:to:cc;
 bh=DB4tcFDGOrH2GrjmZ0zo6vUsLq94zuxHg0Nz965DKGE=;
 b=j50ImrM1I+ZsML7s9RlQunBaZTX5NPYAtVy8ps8cVFNwWaLTuV++Tc4WJEt5ZjdpFs
 lxxpI2Zrcmyb/9Pgb93nOYkZ74nPU0z14H6wVdyzeP40w1p81eIy4ZpMmmBZhR6ol2VU
 NOBQXTukYfCRz/gCMBF9xGi83sk3/iVotnKQHToIGPBbE4p//4ydxKQoHmsWA3gXvZin
 yi92u6Qz6DfNl/lk9OTrDBTalzdPkbJ8wdiXY45b5UXm0Bv1Vn/jpPJBkNT6csf0fL6C
 oY2DZoXPcLPsysHXwfqTE2NxZSF1HPEmRK4hpEvm2KyeEI9G2zhgd8UeY8x3HHwFovjh
 C5LA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AA6/9RlwoR6BpixQs6CvBkCAFybUz+9l7gKERzX44D85ulqOTAjEBtS7tldzPZBs/fUTO7NTR+LZRd549cqiQQ==
X-Received: by 10.107.188.133 with SMTP id m127mr3287728iof.200.1474556312254; 
 Thu, 22 Sep 2016 07:58:32 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.107.129.78 with HTTP; Thu, 22 Sep 2016 07:58:31 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <48632d42-ea2b-b147-737d-d7decfdbcff4@multiplay.co.uk>
References: <0D84203FAAFD0A8E7BBB24A3@10.12.30.106>
 <bc33560b-59bc-01be-6a5d-7994ac121258@multiplay.co.uk>
 <6E574F1B61786E6032824A88@10.12.30.106>
 <2c62f5f0-3fb4-f513-2a8f-02de3a1d552f@FreeBSD.org>
 <20160921235703.GG1018@cell.glebi.us>
 <48632d42-ea2b-b147-737d-d7decfdbcff4@multiplay.co.uk>
From: Ryan Stone <rysto32@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2016 10:58:31 -0400
Message-ID: <CAFMmRNw=k4Vze-eao7peky+R40cB3BoQOc-JYuHWZfVRXR2psQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: lagg Interfaces - don't do Gratuitous ARP?
To: Steven Hartland <killing@multiplay.co.uk>
Cc: Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@freebsd.org>, Kubilay Kocak <koobs@freebsd.org>, 
 freebsd-net <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>, Karl Pielorz <kpielorz_lst@tdx.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.23
X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23
Precedence: list
List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD <freebsd-net.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-net>,
 <mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-net/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-net@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
 <mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2016 14:58:33 -0000

On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 4:04 AM, Steven Hartland <killing@multiplay.co.uk>
wrote:

> The disappointing thing about this is we had a solution, all be it one not
> everyone liked, nearly a year ago now and yet here we are still stuck with
> a broken lagg implementation in the tree.
>

I would point out this 4-year-old thread in which a former co-worker
pointed the same issue with GARPs not being issued and proposed a fix that
was rejected (rightly) for being too much of a layer violation.  It's
disappointing to me to see that somebody has fixed the issue in exactly the
way proposed in this thread, only to have the method that was correct 4
years ago rejected today.

https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-net/2012-February/031328.html