From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Thu May 30 05:39:40 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 712A8E6 for ; Thu, 30 May 2013 05:39:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from andreev.peter@gmail.com) Received: from mail-wg0-x22f.google.com (mail-wg0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c00::22f]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0CD3DFB9 for ; Thu, 30 May 2013 05:39:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wg0-f47.google.com with SMTP id e11so6892104wgh.26 for ; Wed, 29 May 2013 22:39:39 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=GSEEekO8lALnsMT0Q5xLlirUYPuTNvf31teQvCCocKk=; b=DAtUGJjNcsz9S0SfZYeDlu3ewoMhR77HvDuj2hZWgPtstVylEkVGsqfGLZmyRUkmNU ss+6X9SBGfFV1wYWfjKf9L/o8ipEVQGj+71Ynz/tGMeZv9r0a+cTI0dIcda8Bu4Z5WNl LwgvkZvVaPDkEHnPj/kqKue/AUWlr5uaOxq6AQ6gKNNEogqlP7nEdUXshzBZg6FJ22Pr CDqktJ/+rM+aIaM3YxjGliidcqsRpCmfj5NWdX2Hrcp3eaO9jlqlqpnSavkuaEMs96l2 y1FLepdE9D6HS8wz1/N9Kx7gdGfay1a7hJFxEZC9Gv6r1TAWUoey9XqfhZAoKCELsdsJ lztw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.181.13.229 with SMTP id fb5mr2872039wid.16.1369892379117; Wed, 29 May 2013 22:39:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.227.52.134 with HTTP; Wed, 29 May 2013 22:39:39 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <44bo7t4cyf.fsf@lowell-desk.lan> References: <44bo7t4cyf.fsf@lowell-desk.lan> Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 09:39:39 +0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Any arp table size limitations? From: Peter Andreev To: freebsd Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.14 X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 05:39:40 -0000 Thank you Lowell, Yes, that's an Internet exchange point. We have done a similar test and didn't found any problems, I asked on maillist just to be sure. 2013/5/30 Lowell Gilbert > Peter Andreev writes: > > > We are connecting to an IXP, they have tested our FreeBSD 9.1 server and > > said we can store only about 600 MACs simultaneously. So I'd like to ask > if > > there is any arp table size limitations and if so, how we can increase > the > > limit? > > I looked at the code and there don't seem to be any arbitrary > limits. The code isn't optimized for really large numbers of entries, > but 600 isn't what I'd consider large in this context. > > I ran a simple shell script and had no problems entering many thousands > of static ARP entries, so my interpretation from reading the code isn't > horribly wrong. I think you need to find out what kind of problems they > ran into at 600 entries. > > As a (maybe-irrelevant) side point, I don't know what you mean by IXP, > since in my background the term means "Internet eXchange Point," and > isn't likely to get anywhere close to 600 ARP entries on a single > subnet. > -- AP