From owner-freebsd-hackers Thu Oct 10 13:39:11 1996 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id NAA14174 for hackers-outgoing; Thu, 10 Oct 1996 13:39:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from alpo.whistle.com (alpo.whistle.com [207.76.204.38]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id NAA14169 for ; Thu, 10 Oct 1996 13:39:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from current1.whistle.com (current1.whistle.com [207.76.205.22]) by alpo.whistle.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id NAA01356; Thu, 10 Oct 1996 13:36:22 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <325D5DCD.167EB0E7@whistle.com> Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 13:34:21 -0700 From: Julian Elischer Organization: Whistle Communications X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0b6 (X11; I; FreeBSD 2.2-CURRENT i386) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: michael butler CC: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Annoying artifact of the routing code References: <199610100838.SAA19800@asstdc.scgt.oz.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk michael butler wrote: > > Julian Elischer writes: > > > The following bug has been annoying us here for ages > > I recently decided to track it down.. > > > set up device (ethernet) to use address A.B.C.D > > > do some work > > > change device to new address A.B.C.E > > I remember having a conversation with Ravi from Cisco in June about this > because I managed to totally confuse one of their routers (required reload) > by doing this :-) > > He seemed to think that the 'correct' thing to do was to invalidate any > cached arp entries (held by others) for the old address by means of some > broadcast on the ether concerned. Is such an arp packet defined or is it a > 'Cisco special' ? If it is a 'standard' mechanism, why don't we use it in > such cases ? No that's something different.. WE (FREEBSD) are sending out packets FROM OUR OLD ADDRESS even though there is no interface with that address any more.. > > michael