Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2018 11:00:54 +0100 (CET) From: sthaug@nethelp.no To: melifaro@ipfw.ru Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Does FreeBSD do proactive ARP refresh? Message-ID: <20180316.110054.74682026.sthaug@nethelp.no> In-Reply-To: <8530131521193098@web19g.yandex.ru> References: <20180315.210552.74686746.sthaug@nethelp.no> <8530131521193098@web19g.yandex.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > I have a reproducible problem on 11.1-STABLE where, during a longterm > > iperf3 session, some packets are lost every time ARP is refreshed (every > > net.link.ether.inet.max_age seconds). Checking with tcpdump, I can > > indeed see that the packet loss is happening as the hosts are doing > > ARP request/reply. > I'll take a look. Indeed, the intended behaviour is to proactively refresh the record. > Is the situation the same with forwarding and locally-originated traffic? > With local TCP socket inpcb route caching might come into play. My testing is with locally-originated UDP traffic (iperf3 -u). Haven't tested what happens if the box is forwarding the traffic - however, I believe TCP socket inpcb route caching should not be relevant for the UDP traffic? (But there is also a TCP transaction between the iperf3 sender and the iperf3 receiver at the *start* of the iperf3 session.) In any case, I will also test what happens if the box is forwarding the traffic. Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sthaug@nethelp.no
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20180316.110054.74682026.sthaug>