From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jun 8 18:44:31 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0080E1065678 for ; Tue, 8 Jun 2010 18:44:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jdc@koitsu.dyndns.org) Received: from qmta13.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net (qmta13.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net [76.96.27.243]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB2328FC18 for ; Tue, 8 Jun 2010 18:44:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from omta18.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.30.74]) by qmta13.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id TRB61e0051bwxycADWkW5r; Tue, 08 Jun 2010 18:44:30 +0000 Received: from koitsu.dyndns.org ([98.248.46.159]) by omta18.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id TWkV1e0093S48mS8eWkVbr; Tue, 08 Jun 2010 18:44:29 +0000 Received: by icarus.home.lan (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 29AAB9B418; Tue, 8 Jun 2010 11:44:29 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2010 11:44:29 -0700 From: Jeremy Chadwick To: Stephen Clark Message-ID: <20100608184429.GA12052@icarus.home.lan> References: <4C0E81D7.8020209@earthlink.net> <20100608180506.GA9340@icarus.home.lan> <4C0E8B42.70603@earthlink.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4C0E8B42.70603@earthlink.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Cc: FreeBSD Stable Subject: Re: FreeBSD eats 169.254.x.x addressed packets X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2010 18:44:31 -0000 On Tue, Jun 08, 2010 at 02:26:10PM -0400, Stephen Clark wrote: > On 06/08/2010 02:05 PM, Jeremy Chadwick wrote: > >On Tue, Jun 08, 2010 at 01:45:59PM -0400, Stephen Clark wrote: > >>Why does FreeBSD 6.3 eat 169.254.x.x addressed packet when > >>4.9 didn't? > > > >The following output would help: > > > >- ifconfig -a > >- netstat -rn > >- Contents of /etc/rc.conf > > > >Also, be aware that RELENG_6 is to be EOL'd at the end of this year: > >http://security.freebsd.org/ > > > Hi Jeremy, > > I am not sure that information is relevant. We have two systems configured > identically one using 4.9 the other 6.3. My concern was that someone had botched something up in rc.conf or during the OS upgrade/migration, resulting in there being no loopback interface. I also wanted to verify that your routing table looked correct for what ifconfig showed. Other users pointed you to RFC 3927. Wikipedia has this to say: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Link-local_address "Based on RFC 3927, IPv4 uses the 169.254.0.0/16 range of addresses. However, the first and last /24 subnet (256 addresses each) in this block have been excluded from use and are reserved by the standard.[1]" I read this to mean 169.254.0.0/24 and 169.254.255.0/24. Your previous ifconfig statement shows: > $ ifconfig rl0 > rl0: flags=8843 mtu 1500 > options=8 > inet 192.168.129.1 netmask 0xffffff00 broadcast 192.168.129.255 > inet 169.254.1.1 netmask 0xffff0000 broadcast 169.254.255.255 > ether 00:30:18:ae:7c:77 > media: Ethernet autoselect (100baseTX ) > status: active With this configuration, you're using both the first and last /24 netblocks -- 169.254.0.0 for your network address, and 169.254.255.255 for your broadcast address. You should be able to avoid this by using 169.254.1.0/24. -- | Jeremy Chadwick jdc@parodius.com | | Parodius Networking http://www.parodius.com/ | | UNIX Systems Administrator Mountain View, CA, USA | | Making life hard for others since 1977. PGP: 4BD6C0CB |