From owner-freebsd-stable Sat Sep 4 23:29:29 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from dingo.cdrom.com (castles529.castles.com [208.214.165.93]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89C6315156 for ; Sat, 4 Sep 1999 23:29:27 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mike@dingo.cdrom.com) Received: from dingo.cdrom.com (LOCALHOST [127.0.0.1]) by dingo.cdrom.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) with ESMTP id XAA09791; Sat, 4 Sep 1999 23:23:04 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mike@dingo.cdrom.com) Message-Id: <199909050623.XAA09791@dingo.cdrom.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0.2 2/24/98 To: dg@root.com Cc: Mike Smith , Paul Saab , stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: analyzing a crash of 3.2-RELEASE In-reply-to: Your message of "Sat, 04 Sep 1999 22:09:24 PDT." <199909050509.WAA02378@implode.root.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Sat, 04 Sep 1999 23:23:04 -0700 From: Mike Smith Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > >This looks like a race in the route handling code that was fixed a > >while back; you can either disable path MTU discovery (which prevents > >the massive routing table growth that you may also see in your > >application) or update to 3.2-stable in which I _believe_ that this has > > Why would disabling PMTUD have any affect on that? The clone routes should > still be created just as before. They should? It was my understanding that the clone routes were only created in order to hold the PMTU information as required. If not, then I guess we still have a race somewhere in the route manipulation code, unless this is fixed as a side-effect of rev 1.18 of radix.c. -- \\ The mind's the standard \\ Mike Smith \\ of the man. \\ msmith@freebsd.org \\ -- Joseph Merrick \\ msmith@cdrom.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message