From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Aug 4 18:46:50 2009 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 CE8DB1065670 for ; Tue, 4 Aug 2009 18:46:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from julian@elischer.org) Received: from outQ.internet-mail-service.net (outq.internet-mail-service.net [216.240.47.240]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B26DF8FC14 for ; Tue, 4 Aug 2009 18:46:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from julian@elischer.org) Received: from idiom.com (mx0.idiom.com [216.240.32.160]) by out.internet-mail-service.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D03A23E1D5; Tue, 4 Aug 2009 11:46:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Client-Authorized: MaGic Cook1e X-Client-Authorized: MaGic Cook1e X-Client-Authorized: MaGic Cook1e X-Client-Authorized: MaGic Cook1e Received: from julian-mac.elischer.org (home.elischer.org [216.240.48.38]) by idiom.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FBB82D601F; Tue, 4 Aug 2009 11:46:49 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4A78822D.1080507@elischer.org> Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2009 11:47:09 -0700 From: Julian Elischer User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (Macintosh/20090605) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jack Vogel References: <4A773D09.3030404@delphij.net> <2a41acea0908041011kaba6ab0ra6fec3b309fc42ef@mail.gmail.com> <4A786E80.5020201@elischer.org> <2a41acea0908041102h4249faa4r8db4f9178f0ca172@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <2a41acea0908041102h4249faa4r8db4f9178f0ca172@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Jack F Vogel , freebsd-net@freebsd.org, d@delphij.net Subject: Re: em(4): sending ARP regardless of NOARP flag 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: Tue, 04 Aug 2009 18:46:51 -0000 Jack Vogel wrote: > Ya, except that's when the hardware 'eats' the arp that the OS sends, > not one > where it sends one the OS doesn't want :) > > This is the first I've even heard of this option, but I can't see how its a > driver thing, either the stack sends an arp packet or it doesnt, right? noarp is supposed to stop it responding to arps too. it won't stop IPMI from doing it though. just an idea > > jack > > > On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 10:23 AM, Julian Elischer > wrote: > > Jack Vogel wrote: > > I don't see how arping or not can be a driver problem, the > driver just sends > packets queued by the stack, there exists NO mechanism to > communicate > that kind of thing down into the driver, -arp is something that > must be > negotiated in the stack somewhere, as for it working with > broadcom... > > > > except for the system management stuff. > >