Date: Thu, 21 Dec 1995 09:42:09 -0700 From: Nate Williams <nate@rocky.sri.MT.net> To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.tfs.com> Cc: Nate Williams <nate@rocky.sri.MT.net>, joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de (Joerg Wunsch), hackers@freebsd.org, isp@freebsd.org Subject: Re: BSD networking code guru needed? Message-ID: <199512211642.JAA02865@rocky.sri.MT.net> In-Reply-To: <5392.819562490@critter.tfs.com> References: <199512211610.JAA02765@rocky.sri.MT.net> <5392.819562490@critter.tfs.com>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
> > > I stopped using routed and made static routes, and have had no > > > problems since. > > > > Unfortunately, that's not a solution given that the boxes can exist on > > the local ethernet and come in via PPP (portables are great fun). > > No, but it's probably something we can use as a data-point to find out > what's going on. > > The thing I don't like is that packets get routed counter to what > "netstat -rna" & "arp -a" reports. In my case packets were sent > out a wrong interface even. So we are talking about some pointer > which ends up pointing to the wrong arp-entry I think. Hmm, I'm not seeing that problem here. What I'm seeing is it's not recognizing the the arp entries are for the same host. Here's the output of netstat -ra: Internet: Destination Gateway Flags Refs Use Netif Expire default gateway UGSc 0 0 de0 localhost localhost UH 1 2 lo0 204.182.243 link#2 UC 1 0 gateway 0:0:c0:50:b9:a UHLW 2 142 de0 1150 rocky 8:0:20:12:55:3e UHLW 4 6066 de0 1149 fly 8:0:20:23:73:e3 UHLW 1 67 de0 408 trout gateway UGH 1 2335 de0 moth localhost UGHS 0 0 lo0 ws1 link#2 UHLW 0 1 ws1.sri.MT.net 0:80:48:e8:27:63 ULS2c 0 0 de0 ws1 0:80:48:e8:27:63 UHLS2 0 0 de0 BASE-ADDRESS.MCA link#2 UCS 0 0 Note the three entries for ws1. And now, arp -a. moth:/usr/src/usr.sbin/pppd % arp -a gateway.sri.MT.net (204.182.243.1) at 0:0:c0:50:b9:a rocky.sri.MT.net (204.182.243.10) at 8:0:20:12:55:3e fly.sri.MT.net (204.182.243.11) at 8:0:20:23:73:e3 ws1.sri.MT.net (204.182.243.100) at (incomplete) ws1.sri.MT.net (204.182.243.100) at 0:80:48:e8:27:63 permanent published ws1.sri.MT.net (204.182.243.100) at 0:80:48:e8:27:63 permanent published (proxy only) I'm not sure about the flags in the routing protocol, but doesn't the routing protocol sort via the destination address? Natehome | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199512211642.JAA02865>