Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2004 20:04:34 -0400 (AST) From: "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@hub.org> To: Barney Wolff <barney@databus.com> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Odd behaviour on em0 device in -stable ... I think ... Message-ID: <20040104200204.V28998@ganymede.hub.org> In-Reply-To: <20040104231252.GA71628@pit.databus.com> References: <20040104162220.S28998@ganymede.hub.org> <20040104231252.GA71628@pit.databus.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 4 Jan 2004, Barney Wolff wrote: > On Sun, Jan 04, 2004 at 04:31:41PM -0400, Marc G. Fournier wrote: > > > > The problem is that I want to move an IP from one of the other servers > > (all with fxp interfaces) over to the 4th, with the em device ... I -alias > > the IP from the fxp device, and alias it over to the em device, and I can > > no longer access it remotely ... > > > > If I alias it onto any of hte other two fxp based servers, it works fine. > > Something, either the switch or the router, has a stale arp table entry. > It's a little curious that this ever works, without resetting whatever > it is. Perhaps the fxp's manage to send a gratuitous arp when taking > on a new alias. re: gratuitous arp ... I was wondering if the nics do anything like this, but, shouldn't be 'ping -S <src ip> <dest ip>' not "force" something? Like, I could see remote pings not being able to find their way, but sourcing one of the IP in question to go out, I would have thought it would have found its way ... Would the arp thing be nic based, or does the OS itself do it? ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email: scrappy@hub.org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040104200204.V28998>