From owner-freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Mon Jan 14 18:16:03 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2392A14828EF for ; Mon, 14 Jan 2019 18:16:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from nonesuch@longcount.org) Received: from mail-ed1-x536.google.com (mail-ed1-x536.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::536]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 359936EDC4 for ; Mon, 14 Jan 2019 18:16:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from nonesuch@longcount.org) Received: by mail-ed1-x536.google.com with SMTP id x30so423171edx.2 for ; Mon, 14 Jan 2019 10:16:02 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=longcount-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=APlEUn+OIC3I94gJVymx+TL6VByMYUYsuVLLnRObcCM=; b=Gm6I+snOTkFSWT7y+EZSNaL4VQjZ2Vj5VUOHf4R/6zVYvtyygt9iY+unc+ez7NALzR LgvNMv7bXBtURXjgrPUDYagQfmfNkCUDDXb+AciBoZpC4yd01dE9dGAQwAxCJwRVijID 22PVw974GA4j2wXymK7jgxvQBxTTVBT4AgjlDTHUIji09HGcf7YxIiyG16vJf0iJmN0a ie3a1OO17Ge+xbkt5MQ3fyY+i7x7iigYrKsGrRvqsoJkcpWCGObrO9b0deY6FUrduV1b THeSIujHFqfevUDyTUAug/gi4jiMPTM/L61L8NK9yolkv0LLQCcO153dsi53I2O6RREw FFzQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=APlEUn+OIC3I94gJVymx+TL6VByMYUYsuVLLnRObcCM=; b=AVD04dBJ8OrYZnQV/iFSuE/yQ3gjk391VVmugA3/qQkOLPdQMpWczbmhqIZOCSebSL 6GFIG7AIwumAj4DjXZfBGN4vnZyMTOItO0e8B+yC6qYN9BbvPwGbH0ehBg2v9mAoGjLO 9oAq4ijk0M/NhUyJIMorl8EZCAlYWpuspvYhqP3BwlSAXm+HhT9b7XrDuQJ+A8Qu66so y7KivRRcL2l0v8XGzOf9ADHX48yl3a7tH+qZJ6YZc9JW+64pHn1r2uk+s2Kre/se3Umx 3O6HQ2FsLia8IftHtdkceyb1x7dB/II9y9P/ld1kA2mIWA6vMS/6J4zhg2WZqTsaU/RP fMUA== X-Gm-Message-State: AJcUukdpmV3dK6qwEmTAkQFctw9PWA4RKSFpMok8mHLowx0a9wZb1bq3 KY964OaqZIVuS63j06xYCmP0jMcIhwWndj7zWjG3ym3P X-Google-Smtp-Source: ALg8bN7rY+xlw819LuebEu9ePScEUVchNqKCr57WbOqU+pzq7PBa89fEtp+xciibhT/+qchxoXsa9YzAFVHMioMxTAI= X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:6690:: with SMTP id z16-v6mr308483ejo.142.1547489760929; Mon, 14 Jan 2019 10:16:00 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1a2f60f2-6f78-00d6-9287-eaf3408205fa@grosbein.net> In-Reply-To: <1a2f60f2-6f78-00d6-9287-eaf3408205fa@grosbein.net> From: Mark Saad Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2019 13:15:48 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Removing an alias can remove routes ? To: Eugene Grosbein Cc: FreeBSD Hackers Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 359936EDC4 X-Spamd-Bar: ---- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=pass header.d=longcount-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.s=20150623 header.b=Gm6I+snO X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.79 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[longcount-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com:s=20150623]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; IP_SCORE(-2.58)[ip: (-9.06), ipnet: 2a00:1450::/32(-2.02), asn: 15169(-1.77), country: US(-0.08)]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[longcount.org]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; TO_DN_ALL(0.00)[]; MX_GOOD(-0.01)[cached: alt1.aspmx.l.google.com]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[longcount-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com:+]; RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[6.3.5.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.2.0.0.4.6.8.4.0.5.4.1.0.0.a.2.list.dnswl.org : 127.0.5.0]; R_SPF_NA(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.90)[-0.901,0]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; SUBJECT_ENDS_QUESTION(1.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:15169, ipnet:2a00:1450::/32, country:US]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; RCVD_TLS_LAST(0.00)[] X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2019 18:16:03 -0000 On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 11:58 AM Eugene Grosbein wrote: > > 14.01.2019 23:29, Mark Saad wrote: > > > So I wanted to remove the alias ended in 163 and fix its netmask back to /32 > > And this was right desision. > > > I ran this > > > > ifconfig lagg0.vlan1044 inet 10.24.213.163/24 -alias && ifconfig > > lagg0.vlan1044 inet 10.24.213.163/32 -alias > > > > and shortly there after all of the routes that went out lagg0.vlan1044 > > were gone . I quickly undid my change and put the routes back but I am > > not sure what caused this ? Anyone have any ideas I have done this in > > the past with out issue and I am unsure whats changed other then the > > box have a long up time of 463 days . > > Wrong original netmask of an alias was a reason of this. > You should use /32 only for aliases. Re-add all aliases with /32 > then re-add routes and you will be fine. > That's what I was originally attempting to do . What I am now wondering is; Should I follow the convention of the all alias ip in the subnet of the primary (non-alias) address should be /32 . Then the first occurrence of a new subnet as an alias should have its real mask and then all subsequent aliases of the new subnet be /32 or should all aliases just be /32 ? I am going to test this on 10-STABLE in a few mins to see what I get. -- mark saad | nonesuch@longcount.org