From owner-freebsd-questions Thu Nov 14 14:20:38 1996 Return-Path: owner-questions Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id OAA10833 for questions-outgoing; Thu, 14 Nov 1996 14:20:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.crl.com (mail.crl.com [165.113.1.22]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id OAA10756 for ; Thu, 14 Nov 1996 14:20:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from silmu.cc.jyu.fi by mail.crl.com with SMTP id AA04137 (5.65c/IDA-1.5 for ); Thu, 14 Nov 1996 14:21:02 -0800 Received: from localhost (kallio@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by silmu.cc.jyu.fi (8.8.2/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA00814; Fri, 15 Nov 1996 00:16:24 +0200 (EET) Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 00:16:24 +0200 (EET) From: Seppo Kallio To: "Brian J. McGovern" Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Arp overwrite... In-Reply-To: <199611142142.QAA17705@spoon.beta.com> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-questions@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Yes Yes Yes. "Problem is in the Cisco box." My problem is in the to FreeBSD boxes. And I am wonderin why the Solaris, Linux, HP boxes do not have the same problem. 1. no messages in the log files in Solaris, Linux 2. no complaining users in Solaris, Linux I am not 100% sure if it helps installin Linux into the FreeBSD boxes, our Linux boxes are News and WWW servers and are not used direcly from terminals (micros) as hevy as the FreeBSD boxes are. But Solaris nodes have 60-70 users and they have no problems. Seppo On Thu, 14 Nov 1996, Brian J. McGovern wrote: > Arp overwrites will decimate any packet destine for that machine. Therefore, > all connections from that box to the destination will drop. > > You can try using the arp command to staticly enter the data. I don't know > if the dynamic arp requests will overwrite it or not. > > In actuallity, you wouldn't be the only person experiencing this problem. Any > machine thats on the network that this machine is on will also see > exactly the same problems. Its not the FreeBSD machine's fault. It is the > faulting of the Cisco/network engineering. "Patching" the problem will really > just make it worse. I'd sit on the networking people to figure the Cisco out - > simply cause I'll bet a weeks pay that it'll never work 100% even if you > do manage to kludge it. > -Brian >