From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Sep 4 13:56:19 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E99E787B for ; Thu, 4 Sep 2014 13:56:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-vc0-x236.google.com (mail-vc0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c03::236]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ACD351B4B for ; Thu, 4 Sep 2014 13:56:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-vc0-f182.google.com with SMTP id im17so10741379vcb.13 for ; Thu, 04 Sep 2014 06:56:18 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=v+JVxp35OfDJjoRk/jj4mybzsiOO+PNDvnZHJXn1dPg=; b=LfJ2RNQKsE/YzeK7CfCdYPP/8pqqnmlM/2wKGotxpsN/gk4ztnTMRLN99zMYm3C8GU 9PojibLH8RN+8/6eX79gQQ4/m9xO4yNMtyWlmK+VbAYMoP/rEjifKDzVQZrukBZHeIEw nmLB2dE9fASocoCbD6P5fuG+KJ1B3IsbXJmeBBmSA9EhALDiv7FkvOozHbBL1AkoeRfW HLLh5Ycei4kOdA4wVrcDuNQsjw3HRt016vHwQAgqRGjU8Y6+eIeVEpVkEFB056qSaNtS QR7zt+55AaoHUjWcsSXTk2ktsl8VhV4ZlRjtVaKNd9kqHKd0Mf2nTLYmL2uvB0w7WooO 36YA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.52.87.144 with SMTP id ay16mr3257209vdb.43.1409838978614; Thu, 04 Sep 2014 06:56:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.53.3.139 with HTTP; Thu, 4 Sep 2014 06:56:18 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2014 17:56:18 +0400 Message-ID: Subject: 10-STABLE and setfib From: Pavel Timofeev To: freebsd-stable stable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2014 13:56:20 -0000 Hi! I've read this topic in forum https://forums.freebsd.org/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=47693 where described how to deal with default route for jail with different fib. I tried it on 2 same virt machines, but with different interface name and ip addresses than on forum. While it works in 10.0-RELEASE it doesn't work in 10.1-PRERELEASE r271030. It says 'Network is unreachable' while booting. Here is a piece of dmesg.boot: add net 172.16.220.0: gateway hn1 fib 1 add net default: gateway 172.16.220.1 fib 1 add net default: gateway 192.168.8.1 fib 0 Additional inet routing options: gateway=YES. route: writing to routing socket: Network is unreachable add net fe80::: gateway ::1 fib 0 add net fe80::: gateway ::1 fib 1: Network is unreachable route: writing to routing socket: Network is unreachable add net ff02::: gateway ::1 fib 0 add net ff02::: gateway ::1 fib 1: Network is unreachable route: writing to routing socket: Network is unreachable add net ::ffff:0.0.0.0: gateway ::1 fib 0 add net ::ffff:0.0.0.0: gateway ::1 fib 1: Network is unreachable route: writing to routing socket: Network is unreachable add net ::0.0.0.0: gateway ::1 fib 0 add net ::0.0.0.0: gateway ::1 fib 1: Network is unreachable And 'netstat -rn' doesn't show routes inside the jail. Can anyone confirm such regression?