From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jul 2 02:22:02 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 766B91065677; Wed, 2 Jul 2008 02:22:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mike@sentex.net) Received: from smarthost1.sentex.ca (smarthost1.sentex.ca [64.7.153.18]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33A378FC17; Wed, 2 Jul 2008 02:22:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mike@sentex.net) Received: from lava.sentex.ca (pyroxene.sentex.ca [199.212.134.18]) by smarthost1.sentex.ca (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m622Lx1k087476; Tue, 1 Jul 2008 22:21:59 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from mike@sentex.net) Received: from mdt-xp.sentex.net (simeon.sentex.ca [192.168.43.27]) by lava.sentex.ca (8.13.8/8.13.3) with ESMTP id m622Lxnf088882 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 1 Jul 2008 22:21:59 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from mike@sentex.net) Message-Id: <200807020221.m622Lxnf088882@lava.sentex.ca> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.1.0.9 Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2008 22:21:53 -0400 To: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" , Andre Oppermann From: Mike Tancsa In-Reply-To: <20080701092254.T57089@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net> References: <4852E23E.2040505@gtcomm.net> <4854EBF1.7020708@FreeBSD.org> <200807010606.m6166jFe084204@lava.sentex.ca> <4869EC1E.8060009@freebsd.org> <20080701084933.W57089@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net> <20080701092254.T57089@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.64 on 64.7.153.18 Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, "Bruce M. Simpson" , Paul Subject: Re: Route messages X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2008 02:22:02 -0000 At 05:24 AM 7/1/2008, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote: >So I had a very quick look at the code between doing something else. >I think the only change needed is this if I am not mistaken but my >head is far away nowhere close enough in this code. Hi, The patch seems to work in that there is not an RTM_MISS message generated per packet forwarded on my test box. Is it the "final" / correct version ? ---Mike