>
> > I have configured a 4-stable machine to be a router, routing ipv4,
> ipv6
> > and ipx. To be able to do Ethernet_II framing on one interface and
> 802.3
> > on another I have used if_ef.ko.
> >
> > I then noticed that "... kernel: nd6_storelladdr failed" gets logged
> > often and after a while all mbufs are used. It turned out that in
> > sys/net/if_ethersubr.c in ether_output() when nd6_storelladdr()
> fails,
> > it does a return(0) and does not free the mbuf. I checked -current
> > and it is still like that.
>
> It should not be freeing the mbuf, because that mbuf is being
> passed as an argument to ether_output(). It is typically the caller
> that ought to be responsible for freeing the mbuf in this case.
The purpose of ether_output() is normally to get the packet (mbuf)
onto the correct interface queue so that it will be sent out. As such
whoever calls ether_output() is not going to do anything with that
mbuf again. If ether_output don't put it on a queue, it should free
it.
Well maybe I was a bit vague about the exact place. I claim that the
return(0) at line 188 of if_ethersubr.c in -stable and line 189 in
-current should be "goto bad" or something that will either use the
mbuf or do a m_freem() and not just return and leave the mbuf in the
air.
The code looks something like this:
case AF_INET6:
if (!nd6_storelladdr(&ac->ac_if, rt, m, dst, (u_char *)edst)) {
/* this must be impossible, so we bark */
printf("nd6_storelladdr failed\n");
===> return(0);
}
>
> > Now the reason it fails is that the ef(4) device use an ifp->if_type
> > (IFT_XETHER) that nd6_storelladdr() does not expect.
> >
> > Oh as a workaround I have configured route6d to ignore fxp1f0.
> >
John
--
John Hay -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
