Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 12:05:26 -0700 From: Steve Francis <steve@expertcity.com> To: Romain Kang <romain@kzsu.stanford.edu> Cc: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: post-ifconfig delay causes ntpdate failure? Message-ID: <3DB995F6.90506@expertcity.com> References: <20021025190027.GA45509@kzsu.stanford.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Um.. Seems like its the switch port Spanning tree bringing the port
active after 15 seconds of learning and 15 seconds of listening?
Romain Kang wrote:
>I spent some time trying to figure out why the my ntpdate doesn't
>seem to work. It appears to me that the fxp0 isn't transmitting
>for a relatively long period of time following the ifconfig. The
>saga follows.
>
>On the client (10.10.1.101), I gave ntpdate the -d flag and saved
>its output. ntpdate claimed that the server (10.10.1.100) never
>replied to its ntp queries.
>
>I stuck a tcpdump into rc.network, then ran a ping loop to see how
>long it took before the first ping to the server succeeded. The
>shell code claimed 25 seconds:
> (T0=`date +%s`
> I=0
> MAX=30
> echo "rc.network: first ping test"
> while ! { ping -q -c1 10.10.1.100 > /dev/null; }
> do
> I=`expr $I + 1`
> test $I -ge $MAX && break
> sleep 1
> done
> T1=`date +%s`
> DIFF=`expr $T1 - $T0`
> echo "$DIFF seconds to first successful ping") >> $LOG 2>&1
>
>tcpdump on the client saw:
>
>23:55:53.019046 arp who-has 10.10.1.100 (2e:2f:30:31:32:33) tell 10.10.1.101
>23:56:05.219283 arp who-has 10.10.1.100 (2e:2f:30:31:32:33) tell 10.10.1.101
>23:56:05.220140 arp reply 10.10.1.100 is-at 0:90:fb:8:71:fd
>23:56:05.220172 10.10.1.101 > 10.10.1.100: icmp: echo request
>23:56:05.221017 10.10.1.100 > 10.10.1.101: icmp: echo reply
>
>The server saw:
>
>23:56:05.967915 arp who-has 10.10.1.100 (2e:2f:30:31:32:33) tell 10.10.1.101
>23:56:05.967950 arp reply 10.10.1.100 is-at 0:90:fb:8:71:fd
>23:56:05.969464 10.10.1.101 > 10.10.1.100: icmp: echo request
>23:56:05.969513 10.10.1.100 > 10.10.1.101: icmp: echo reply
>
>With the ping loop inserted before ntpdate, the client was able to
>get its initial date set. This works, but it seems like a crude hack.
>Anyone have a better idea?
>--
>Romain Kang Disclaimer: I speak for myself alone,
>romain@kzsu.stanford.edu except when indicated otherwise.
>
>To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
>with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
>
>
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3DB995F6.90506>