Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2011 15:38:17 +0000 From: "Li, Qing" <qing.li@bluecoat.com> To: Ingo Flaschberger <if@freebsd.org>, Nikolay Denev <ndenev@gmail.com> Cc: "freebsd-net@freebsd.org" <freebsd-net@freebsd.org> Subject: RE: Routing enhancement - reduce routing table locking Message-ID: <B143A8975061C446AD5E29742C531723025A9F@PWSVL-EXCMBX-01.internal.cacheflow.com> In-Reply-To: <alpine.LRH.2.00.1104051615160.2152@filebunker.xip.at> References: <alpine.LRH.2.00.1104050303140.2152@filebunker.xip.at> <E0E87D94-3DE3-4884-8FBB-CC778486C364@gmail.com>, <alpine.LRH.2.00.1104051615160.2152@filebunker.xip.at>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
kern/155772 can be resolved using RADIX_MPATH. > > regarding kern/155772: > at stock 8.2 FreeBSD the system panics after ifconfig down / ifconfig up / > ifconfig down with 1 route and 1 interface route (multipath). > What's the exact step and a specific example that triggers a panic ? > > Also there are problems with arp, due wrong multipath route selection > (if the decision is already made that the route should go the direct way, > the route and not the interface route is choosen, depends on which route > was first in the tree). > I am not quite getting what you are saying about. What do you mean when you say:" .. the route should go the direct way, the route and not the interface route ..." What is the "route" that "goes the direct way" ? > > And finally, there are problems when adding / deleteing routes. > > example that does not work: > ifconfig em0 192.168.0.1/24 > ifconfig em1 10.0.0.1/24 > route add 10.0.0.0/24 192.168.0.2 > What doesn't work ? The add or the delete operation? I can add and delete the 10.0.0.0/24 route fine on my system. -- Qing
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?B143A8975061C446AD5E29742C531723025A9F>