Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 1 Jul 2024 19:16:07 -0400
From:      Michael Proto <mike@jellydonut.org>
To:        Craig Leres <leres@freebsd.org>
Cc:        freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: FreeBSD 14.x localhost source address
Message-ID:  <CAGAnWo1z-cQKzgQhZvo7HuLLstWu9nMDbbjXYDFr4iCbA1sXfw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <7005d0ed-70ea-4c70-ac61-2a12e023cdd7@freebsd.org>
References:  <086405e2-8fc2-4463-b8bb-d6c652745ae1@freebsd.org> <CAGAnWo2LbT6mGdgo7u5CA6d%2BQE8bX9nJagaHMn5p=3DBsC0fOg@mail.gmail.com> <7005d0ed-70ea-4c70-ac61-2a12e023cdd7@freebsd.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Jul 1, 2024 at 7:04=E2=80=AFPM Craig Leres <leres@freebsd.org> wrot=
e:
>
> On 7/1/24 15:53, Michael Proto wrote:
> >   What netmask are you using for 127.0.0.2? I'd treat it as I would an
> > IP alias (only on localhost) with a /32 netmask, should keep it
> > isolated. Just tried it myself on a test box and iperf works as
> > expected, using 127.0.0.1 as the source when connecting.
>
> I was just looking at that and I used 127.0.0.2 without an explicit mask
> and the system picked /24. I'm not sure why I did it that way but it's
> been awhile.
>
> I just got rid of lo2 and made 127.0.0.2/32 an alias on lo0 and it seems
> to work better all around.
>
> I guess the overlap between 127.0.0.0/8 and 127.0.0.0/24 was problematic.
>
>                 Craig

Yep, most network stacks I'm familiar with will pick the more-specific
route when given two options like that, hence the use of 127.0.0.2 as
the source. Glad its working now.


-Proto



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAGAnWo1z-cQKzgQhZvo7HuLLstWu9nMDbbjXYDFr4iCbA1sXfw>