From owner-freebsd-current  Thu May  9 13:30:39 1996
Return-Path: owner-current
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id NAA14953
          for current-outgoing; Thu, 9 May 1996 13:30:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sierra.zyzzyva.com (ppp0.zyzzyva.com [198.183.2.50])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id NAA14947
          Thu, 9 May 1996 13:30:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from zyzzyva.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sierra.zyzzyva.com (8.7.5/8.6.11) with ESMTP id PAA01625; Thu, 9 May 1996 15:30:10 -0500 (CDT)
Message-Id: <199605092030.PAA01625@sierra.zyzzyva.com>
To: davidg@root.com
cc: stable@freebsd.org, current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Continued MBUF problem with ET V.35 card 
In-reply-to: davidg's message of Thu, 09 May 1996 12:54:06 -0700.
         <199605091954.MAA02913@Root.COM> 
X-uri: http://www.zyzzyva.com/
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Thu, 09 May 1996 15:30:09 -0500
From: Randy Terbush <randy@zyzzyva.com>
Sender: owner-current@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> >>    Are your sure there really is a leak? What does the machine do other than
> >> operate a sync card?
> >
> >It's running routed and named and at this time has had very little use
> >due to instability.  I've never seen this kind of MBUF usage on any machine
> >and that does count for quite a few.  It consistently grows to the max
> >configured, and then will reboot shortly thereafter.
> >
> >Are you running routed?
> 
>    Not currently, but I have in the past. I am running named.

I'm going to direct a copy of this back to the current and stable lists...

I have been able to pin this down to routed, or rather the use of
a routing protocol, since firing up gated to use RIP has the same
effect. (growth of mbuf use by about 10mbufs/30sec).

I've read some other questions raised lately about routing/routed
problems. Anyone have a hint as to what might be going on here?