Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2018 02:38:57 -0700 (PDT) From: "Rodney W. Grimes" <freebsd-rwg@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net> To: "Alexander V. Chernikov" <melifaro@ipfw.ru> Cc: "freebsd-net@freebsd.org" <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>, "sthaug@nethelp.no" <sthaug@nethelp.no> Subject: Re: Does FreeBSD do proactive ARP refresh? Message-ID: <201803180938.w2I9cvJs006183@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net> In-Reply-To: <3023141521364867@web33j.yandex.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> 18.03.2018, 03:31, "Rodney W. Grimes" <freebsd-rwg@pdx.rh.cn85.dnsmgr.net>: > >> ?17.03.2018, 21:23, "Rodney W. Grimes" <freebsd-rwg@pdx.rh.cn85.dnsmgr.net>: > >> ?>> ?16.03.2018, 14:50, "sthaug@nethelp.no" <sthaug@nethelp.no>: > >> ?>> ?.. > >> ?>> ?>> ?And thank you for that suggestion! The packet loss during ARP refresh > >> ?>> ?>> ?(of the destination address connected to the output interface) does > >> ?>> ?>> ?*not* happen when the box is forwarding! It only happens with locally > >> ?>> ?>> ?generated traffic. > >> ?>> ?Should be fixed by r331098. > >> ?> > >> ?> Thanks for the quick fix, do we know about when this breakage started? > >> ?I guess it's something like r297225. > > > > SO 2 years ago, meaning it effects stable/11, > > and may of been merged to stable/10? > Side note: if one has monitoring which does ICMP checks, it will mask the issue because icmp replies don't use route caching. > Typical story when the observer changes the state of an observed object :-). Also perhaps why it has not been reported before, as other side effects have caused it to be a pretty invisible issue. > IIRC it was not merged to stable/10. > > > > Do you plan to MFC your fix? > Yes, I do :-) For some reason the MFC: 2 weeks did not register when I read the commit. -- Rod Grimes rgrimes@freebsd.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201803180938.w2I9cvJs006183>