Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 17 Nov 1999 22:38:31 +0100 (CET)
From:      Blaz Zupan <blaz@amis.net>
To:        Brian Somers <brian@Awfulhak.org>
Cc:        freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: rinit: wrong ifa (0xc09ba580) was (0xc0854880) - candidate for removal
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSF.4.20.9911172230120.70428-100000@titanic.medinet.si>
In-Reply-To: <199911172128.VAA02251@hak.lan.Awfulhak.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

On Wed, 17 Nov 1999, Brian Somers wrote:
> Nothing's changed of late here.  Ppp will use whatever ``hostname'' 
> resolves to as a default local address unless a ``set ifaddr'' is 
> done.  As you've got a ``set ifaddr'', I find it surprising that 
> you see this message.

Actually, I guess you probably did not notice the rest of my message.

IMHO the behaviour change in ppp is, that now when ppp receives an IP
address (assigned by the dialup server it is dialing to), it does NOT
replace the IP address on the tunX interface, but simply adds it as an
alias on the interface. So every time you dial the internet, the interface
receives another IP address as an alias. In our case, after a day or two,
there are about 60 IP aliases assigned on the tunX interface.

Previous versions of ppp simply _replaced_ the IP address that was present
on the interface before a new IP was assigned by the ppp peer.

For example, after the machine is freshly rebooted, we see this:

gatekeeper# ifconfig tun0
tun0: flags=8051<UP,POINTOPOINT,RUNNING,MULTICAST> mtu 1500
        inet 10.0.0.1 --> 10.0.0.2 netmask 0xffffffff

After we dial the internet, the above addresses are _not_ replaced, but
the new addresses are added as an alias to the interface:

gatekeeper# ifconfig tun0
tun0: flags=8051<UP,POINTOPOINT,RUNNING,MULTICAST> mtu 1500
        inet 10.0.0.1 --> 10.0.0.2 netmask 0xffffffff
        inet 212.18.37.102 --> 212.18.32.20 netmask 0xffffff00

As time goes on, those secondary addresses pile up on the interface. I
believe that's why I get the "wrong ifa" message. Is there any reasoning
behind the secondary addresses or is this behaviour a bug?

Regards,

Blaz Zupan, blaz@amis.net, http://home.amis.net/blaz/
Medinet d.o.o., Linhartova 21, 2000 Maribor, Slovenia



To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.20.9911172230120.70428-100000>