From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jan 7 23:23:36 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A9A18AF0 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2015 23:23:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lagoon.freebsd.lublin.pl (lagoon.freebsd.lublin.pl [193.138.118.3]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A87AFFE for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2015 23:23:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.0.103] (89-77-160-163.dynamic.chello.pl [89.77.160.163]) by lagoon.freebsd.lublin.pl (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 27B52582A02 for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2015 00:13:46 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <54ADBDDC.3040901@frasunek.com> Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2015 00:14:36 +0100 From: Przemyslaw Frasunek Organization: frasunek.com User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Corrupted IPv6 routing table Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2015 23:23:36 -0000 Dear all, We are running FreeBSD 9.2-RELEASE-p3 on few PPPoE access servers, each servicing about 1000 customers. Each server exchanges customers' /32 (for IPv4) and /64 (for IPv6) routes using OSPF and BIRD. Few times in a month, we are experiencing routing table corruption, which causes spurious IPv6 routes appearing with prefixlen 0: # netstat -nr -f inet6 | grep "/\0" 2a02:2928:6:989e::/0 fe80::21e:67ff:fe02:e82b%vlan0 UG1 vlan0 2a02:2928:6:989f::/0 fe80::21e:67ff:fe02:e82b%vlan0 UG1 vlan0 It is impossible to delete such routes and they override default route, making IPv6 networking nonfunctional. They definitely does not originate from OSPF, as there is an export filter which denies prefixlen < 32. Has anyone seen this before?