Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 16:28:13 -0700 From: "Li, Qing" <qing.li@bluecoat.com> To: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net> Cc: Qing Li <qingli@freebsd.org>, FreeBSD Current <current@freebsd.org> Subject: RE: Problem with latest HEAD and IPv6: in6_ifinit: insertion failed Message-ID: <B583FBF374231F4A89607B4D08578A4304E992FE@bcs-mail03.internal.cacheflow.com> In-Reply-To: <20090804053838.I93661@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net> References: <20090803174617.GJ1292@hoeg.nl> <20090803190934.GK1292@hoeg.nl> <20090803195455.I93661@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net> <B583FBF374231F4A89607B4D08578A4304E98951@bcs-mail03.internal.cacheflow.com> <20090804053838.I93661@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I have a patch ready, which will be committed as soon as it is approved
by the release team.
--Qing
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bjoern A. Zeeb [mailto:bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net]
> Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 10:45 PM
> To: Li, Qing
> Cc: FreeBSD Current; Qing Li
> Subject: RE: Problem with latest HEAD and IPv6: in6_ifinit: insertion
> failed
>=20
> On Mon, 3 Aug 2009, Li, Qing wrote:
>=20
> >>
> >> I then changed the script to s,fxp0,em1,g s,::1,::2,g and re-run:
> >>
> >>
> >
---------------------------------------------------------------------
> --
> >> -
> >> dut# sh test.sh
> >> 2001:db8::1 0:e0:81:81:13:ad fxp0 permanent R
> >> 2001:db8::1 2001:db8::1 UH fxp0
> >> em1: flags=3D8802<BROADCAST,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> metric 0 mtu 1500
> >> ifconfig: ioctl (SIOCAIFADDR): File exists
> >> 2001:db8::1 0:e0:81:81:13:ad fxp0 permanent R
> >> 2001:db8::2 0:e0:81:81:13:9d em1 permanent R
> >> 2001:db8::1 2001:db8::1 UH fxp0
> >> 2001:db8::2 2001:db8::2 UH em1
> >> em1: flags=3D8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> metric 0
mtu
> > 1500
> >>
> >
---------------------------------------------------------------------
> --
> >
> >
> > Your output appears to come from either an outdated in6.c
> > or a custom version. I expect to see something like the
> > following for each interface address from netstat output:
> >
> > Destination Gateway Flags Netif
> > expire
> >
---------------------------------------------------------------------
> --
> > 2001:db8::1 link#1 UHS lo0
> > 2001:db8::2 link#2 UHS lo0
> >
---------------------------------------------------------------------
> --
>=20
> Yes I would as well, unless something bad happens(tm).
>=20
> > Please verify your source file.
>=20
> bz@dut:/dut/bz/HEAD.svn% ident sys/netinet6/in6.c
> sys/netinet6/in6.c:
> $KAME: in6.c,v 1.259 2002/01/21 11:37:50 keiichi Exp $
> $FreeBSD: head/sys/netinet6/in6.c 196019 2009-08-01 19:26:27Z
> rwatson $
> bz@dut:/dut/bz/HEAD.svn% svn status sys/netinet6/in6.c
> bz@dut:/dut/bz/HEAD.svn%
>=20
> And as you can see the IFF_POINTOPOINT from your last commit are not
> there
> anymore:
>=20
> 1193 /*
> 1194 * Remove the loopback route to the interface
address.
> 1195 * The check for the current setting of
> "nd6_useloopback" is not needed.
> 1196 */
> 1197 if (!(ia->ia_ifp->if_flags & IFF_LOOPBACK)) {
>=20
> 1776 /*
> 1777 * add a loopback route to self
> 1778 */
> 1779 if (V_nd6_useloopback && !(ifp->if_flags &
> IFF_LOOPBACK)) {
>=20
>=20
> /bz
>=20
> --
> Bjoern A. Zeeb The greatest risk is not taking
one.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?B583FBF374231F4A89607B4D08578A4304E992FE>