On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 11:50 AM, Randall Stewart wrote:
> All
>
> Ok I fixed it ;-)
>
> Its in SVN r249848.
>
> I will see about getting it to 9 stable, 8 stable and maybe even
> 8.4 if RE will let me ;-)
>
Great work. Thanks so much. I was afraid this would linger forever!
> R
> On Apr 23, 201
On 24 April 2013 12:11, Ed Maste wrote:
> On 24 April 2013 14:57, Adrian Chadd wrote:
>> Is this an issue on -7 and -6?
>
> I believe so, and it should get merged there as well.
rrs - prty please? :)
adrian
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org maili
On 24 April 2013 14:57, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> Is this an issue on -7 and -6?
I believe so, and it should get merged there as well.
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any ma
Is this an issue on -7 and -6?
(Since people do still run it, and it seems a simple enough fix?)
adrian
On 24 April 2013 11:50, Randall Stewart wrote:
> All
>
> Ok I fixed it ;-)
>
> Its in SVN r249848.
>
> I will see about getting it to 9 stable, 8 stable and maybe even
> 8.4 if RE will let
All
Ok I fixed it ;-)
Its in SVN r249848.
I will see about getting it to 9 stable, 8 stable and maybe even
8.4 if RE will let me ;-)
R
On Apr 23, 2013, at 9:40 AM, Tom Evans wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 1:08 PM, Randall Stewart wrote:
>> Ok
>>
>> I too have been struck by this *multiple*
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 1:08 PM, Randall Stewart wrote:
> Ok
>
> I too have been struck by this *multiple* times on my base home router.
>
I hate "me too" style posts, since often they conflate unrelated
issues - however, "me too"!
In my scenario, I have a simple home router with a wan if connec
Ok
I too have been struck by this *multiple* times on my base home router.
I am not sure how its happening, but I have placed in my kernel a special
catch that if the default route is set via the normal route.c path and it
is *not* the default route to my ISP, I will crash the kernel.
My thought
On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 12:51 PM, Li, Qing wrote:
> Hi,
>
>>
>> I can confirm I get these messages as well:
>>
>> Mar 7 19:40:25 opole kernel: arpresolve: can't allocate llinfo for
>> 86.58.122.125
>> Mar 7 19:40:25 opole kernel: arpresolve: can't allocate llinfo for
>> 86.58.122.125
>>
>> IP 86.
Hi,
>
> I can confirm I get these messages as well:
>
> Mar 7 19:40:25 opole kernel: arpresolve: can't allocate llinfo for
> 86.58.122.125
> Mar 7 19:40:25 opole kernel: arpresolve: can't allocate llinfo for
> 86.58.122.125
>
> IP 86.58.122.125 is not from IP pool used by me.
>
This kernel
On 07.03.2013 20:27, Krzysztof Barcikowski wrote:
W dniu 2013-03-07 18:09, Andre Oppermann pisze:
On 07.03.2013 17:54, Nick Rogers wrote:
I'm not sure. I have not explicitly enabled/disabled it. I am using
the GENERIC kernel from 9.1 plus PF+ALTQ.
# sysctl net.inet.flowtable.enable
sysctl: unk
W dniu 2013-03-07 18:09, Andre Oppermann pisze:
On 07.03.2013 17:54, Nick Rogers wrote:
I'm not sure. I have not explicitly enabled/disabled it. I am using
the GENERIC kernel from 9.1 plus PF+ALTQ.
# sysctl net.inet.flowtable.enable
sysctl: unknown oid 'net.inet.flowtable.enable'
# sysctl -a |
On 07.03.2013 17:54, Nick Rogers wrote:
I'm not sure. I have not explicitly enabled/disabled it. I am using
the GENERIC kernel from 9.1 plus PF+ALTQ.
# sysctl net.inet.flowtable.enable
sysctl: unknown oid 'net.inet.flowtable.enable'
# sysctl -a | grep flow
kern.sigqueue.overflow: 0
net.inet.tcp.
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 12:25 AM, Andre Oppermann wrote:
> On 05.03.2013 18:39, Nick Rogers wrote:
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I am attempting to create awareness of a serious issue affecting users
>> of FreeBSD 9.x and PF. There appears to be a bug that allows the
>> kernel's routing table to be corrupted
I'm not sure. I have not explicitly enabled/disabled it. I am using
the GENERIC kernel from 9.1 plus PF+ALTQ.
# sysctl net.inet.flowtable.enable
sysctl: unknown oid 'net.inet.flowtable.enable'
# sysctl -a | grep flow
kern.sigqueue.overflow: 0
net.inet.tcp.reass.overflows: 0
net.inet6.ip6.auto_flow
Courtland,
the arpresolve observation is very important. Do you have flowtable
enabled in your kernel?
--
Andre
On 06.03.2013 17:16, Adrian Chadd wrote:
Another instance of it..
Adrian
On 6 March 2013 07:21, Courtland wrote:
Has there been any progress on resolving this problem. Does anyone
I believe I don't have flowtable suport in kernel (no FLOWTABLE option),
and no sysctl's related to flowtable.
How to check if I'm using multiple pfil hooks?
Best regards!
Krzysiek
W dniu 2013-03-06 10:13, Ermal Luçi pisze:
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 9:38 AM, Krzysztof Barcikowski <
krzys...@airn
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 9:38 AM, Krzysztof Barcikowski <
krzys...@airnet.opole.pl> wrote:
> W dniu 2013-03-06 09:25, Andre Oppermann pisze:
>
> Can you describe your traffic forwarding setup in more detail?
>> Is it only pf, or do you run netgraph, or other things as well?
>> Do you use flow routi
On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 09:25:21AM +0100, Andre Oppermann wrote:
> I'm trying to create a stack graph to see which parts of the network
> stack are involved in handling your packet.
Ask people if they're using multiple pfil hooks (even just having
ipfilter loaded counts, for instance).
If that's
W dniu 2013-03-06 09:25, Andre Oppermann pisze:
Can you describe your traffic forwarding setup in more detail?
Is it only pf, or do you run netgraph, or other things as well?
Do you use flow routing?
How frequent does this happen?
I'm trying to create a stack graph to see which parts of the net
On 05.03.2013 18:39, Nick Rogers wrote:
Hello,
I am attempting to create awareness of a serious issue affecting users
of FreeBSD 9.x and PF. There appears to be a bug that allows the
kernel's routing table to be corrupted by traffic routing through the
system. Under heavy traffic load, the defau
It's a known problem; it just seems that it doesn't overlap/intersect
the day to day activities of any network focused freebsd developers.
If you guys want it fixed then you may have to find a developer to
hire on contract to fix it, or find some kind of ruleset/traffic
generation setup that relia
Hi,
I can say also i faced this problem in 9.1-preRelease. And i'm not using
pf, i usyally use ipfw. but i didn't see this happening for a while...
Sami
On Mar 5, 2013 7:39 PM, "Nick Rogers" wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am attempting to create awareness of a serious issue affecting users
> of FreeBSD 9
I was reported this behaviour before.
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=kern/157796
On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 5:27 PM, Krzysztof Barcikowski
wrote:
> W dniu 2012-10-05 16:22, Dominic Blais pisze:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'm using GENERIC. Everything else is added as loaded module.
>>
>> Here's my
W dniu 2012-10-10 13:57, Dominic Blais pisze:
Hi (sorry, I clicked send too fast ;) ),
I had to change the server of my customer who have this bug because we wanted to put 2
redundant servers with carp... I removed the old server and replaced it with 2 brand new
ones. The old one was an HP ML
Hi,
On Wed, 10 Oct 2012 07:57:05 -0400
Dominic Blais wrote:
> Hi (sorry, I clicked send too fast ;) ),
oh yeah, the fast index finger.
>
> replace the gateway. I often see, but not only, Microsoft owned IP as
> my default gateway when it happens.
do you have traffic to these addresses too? Wh
W dniu 2012-10-05 16:22, Dominic Blais pisze:
Hi,
I'm using GENERIC. Everything else is added as loaded module.
Here's my kldstat:
I forgot about modules, here they are:
Id Refs AddressSize Name
1 13 0x8020 12200c8 kernel
21 0x81421000 215f8g
...@freebsd.org [mailto:owner-freebsd-...@freebsd.org] De la
part de Krzysztof Barcikowski
Envoyé : 5 octobre 2012 08:30
À : freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Objet : Re: Default route destination changing without warning follow-up
W dniu 2012-10-05 14:23, Vadim Urazaev pisze:
> I don`t know if it`s import
W dniu 2012-10-05 14:23, Vadim Urazaev pisze:
I don`t know if it`s important, anyway I have only one routing table on
server where this issue happens.
Maybe we should check our kernel configuration to find something similar in
it.
For example I have
options ZERO_COPY_SOCKETS
_
I don`t know if it`s important, anyway I have only one routing table on
server where this issue happens.
Maybe we should check our kernel configuration to find something similar in
it.
For example I have
options ZERO_COPY_SOCKETS
___
freebsd-net@freeb
W dniu 2012-10-05 00:23, Gary Palmer pisze:
On Thu, Oct 04, 2012 at 07:36:51PM +0200, Krzysztof Barcikowski wrote:
W dniu 2012-10-04 18:02, John-Mark Gurney pisze:
Alexander V. Chernikov wrote this message on Mon, Oct 01, 2012 at 01:07 +0400:
On 01.10.2012 00:59, Dominic Blais wrote:
It's all
Blais; freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Objet : Re: Default route destination changing without warning follow-up
On Thu, Oct 04, 2012 at 07:36:51PM +0200, Krzysztof Barcikowski wrote:
> W dniu 2012-10-04 18:02, John-Mark Gurney pisze:
> > Alexander V. Chernikov wrote this message on Mon, Oct 01,
On Thu, Oct 04, 2012 at 07:36:51PM +0200, Krzysztof Barcikowski wrote:
> W dniu 2012-10-04 18:02, John-Mark Gurney pisze:
> > Alexander V. Chernikov wrote this message on Mon, Oct 01, 2012 at 01:07
> > +0400:
> >> On 01.10.2012 00:59, Dominic Blais wrote:
> >>> It's all about IPv4 in my case.
> >>
rk Gurney [mailto:j...@funkthat.com]
> Envoyé : 4 octobre 2012 12:03
> À : Alexander V. Chernikov
> Cc : Dominic Blais; freebsd-net@freebsd.org
> Objet : Re: Default route destination changing without warning follow-up
>
> Alexander V. Chernikov wrote this message on Mon, Oct 01,
W dniu 2012-10-04 18:02, John-Mark Gurney pisze:
Alexander V. Chernikov wrote this message on Mon, Oct 01, 2012 at 01:07 +0400:
On 01.10.2012 00:59, Dominic Blais wrote:
It's all about IPv4 in my case.
It will be great to supply some more details (e.g. like FreeBSD version,
interfaces configur
Cc : Dominic Blais; freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Objet : Re: Default route destination changing without warning follow-up
Alexander V. Chernikov wrote this message on Mon, Oct 01, 2012 at 01:07 +0400:
> On 01.10.2012 00:59, Dominic Blais wrote:
> >It's all about IPv4 in my case.
>
>
Alexander V. Chernikov wrote this message on Mon, Oct 01, 2012 at 01:07 +0400:
> On 01.10.2012 00:59, Dominic Blais wrote:
> >It's all about IPv4 in my case.
>
> It will be great to supply some more details (e.g. like FreeBSD version,
> interfaces configuration, netstat -rn output).
>
> How ofte
affic.
--
-Message d'origine-
De : Dominic Blais
Envoyé : 4 octobre 2012 09:41
À : 'Alexander V. Chernikov'
Cc : freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Objet : RE: Default route destination changing without warning follow-up
Hi,
The server that actually has the problem is:
- FreeBSD 9
W dniu 2012-10-04 15:41, Dominic Blais pisze:
Hi,
The server that actually has the problem is:
- FreeBSD 9.0-RELEASE-p3
- Uses IPFW & dummynet for traffic shaping
- Uses PF for firewalling and NAT
- Uses MPD 5.6 for PPPoE server
- Uses freeradius and PostgreSQL for authentication.
I have si
ge d'origine-
De : Alexander V. Chernikov [mailto:melif...@freebsd.org]
Envoyé : 30 septembre 2012 17:07
À : Dominic Blais
Cc : freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Objet : Re: Default route destination changing without warning follow-up
On 01.10.2012 00:59, Dominic Blais wrote:
> It's all about IP
Chernikov [mailto:melif...@freebsd.org]
Envoyé : 30 septembre 2012 16:39
À : Dominic Blais
Cc : freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Objet : Re: Default route destination changing without warning follow-up
On 01.10.2012 00:33, Dominic Blais wrote:
Yes, I'm very sure of it! A "route monitor"
It's all about IPv4 in my case.
--
-Message d'origine-
De : Alexander V. Chernikov [mailto:melif...@freebsd.org]
Envoyé : 30 septembre 2012 16:39
À : Dominic Blais
Cc : freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Objet : Re: Default route destination changing without warning follow-up
On 01.
PF.
So, are we talking about IPv4 or IPv6?
--
-Message d'origine-
De : Alexander V. Chernikov [mailto:melif...@freebsd.org]
Envoyé : 30 septembre 2012 16:31
À : Dominic Blais
Cc : freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Objet : Re: Default route destination changing without warning follow-up
origine-
De : Alexander V. Chernikov [mailto:melif...@freebsd.org]
Envoyé : 30 septembre 2012 16:31
À : Dominic Blais
Cc : freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Objet : Re: Default route destination changing without warning follow-up
On 01.10.2012 00:00, Dominic Blais wrote:
> Hi,
Hello!
>
> I was just won
On 01.10.2012 00:00, Dominic Blais wrote:
Hi,
Hello!
I was just wondering if there was anything new about the bug of default route
changing without warning... Is there any test I can do to help fixing it?
Can you be a bit more precise and specify FreeBSD version and address
family?
Are yo
> Tue, Dec 18, 2007 at 06:20:53PM +0100, vermaden wrote:
> > > After reading this I feel that you have absolutely no packets on
> > > either interfaces when your Linux box ping FreeBSD. But this
> > > contradicts with your previous assertion that if ICMP packet comes
> > > in on rl1, then it is re
Tue, Dec 18, 2007 at 06:20:53PM +0100, vermaden wrote:
> > After reading this I feel that you have absolutely no packets on
> > either interfaces when your Linux box ping FreeBSD. But this
> > contradicts with your previous assertion that if ICMP packet comes
> > in on rl1, then it is reflected at
> > tcpdump on rl0 still nothing.
>
> After reading this I feel that you have absolutely no packets on
> either interfaces when your Linux box ping FreeBSD. But this
> contradicts with your previous assertion that if ICMP packet comes
> in on rl1, then it is reflected at rl0. Am I missing someth
Good day.
Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 11:58:45AM +0100, vermaden wrote:
> > Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 11:20:32AM +0100, vermaden wrote:
> > > I already used tcpdump, if ICMP packet goes in thru 192.168/16 on rl1
> > the
> > > response goes out on 10/24 on rl0.
Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 11:58:45AM +0100, vermaden
> Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 11:20:32AM +0100, vermaden wrote:
> > I already used tcpdump, if ICMP packet goes in thru 192.168/16 on rl1
> the
> > response goes out on 10/24 on rl0.
>
> And the destination MAC address of the ICMP reply that is going
> through rl0 is?
>
> What if you'll do two experimen
Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 11:20:32AM +0100, vermaden wrote:
> I already used tcpdump, if ICMP packet goes in thru 192.168/16 on rl1 the
> response goes out on 10/24 on rl0.
And the destination MAC address of the ICMP reply that is going
through rl0 is?
What if you'll do two experiments: drop the defau
Good day.
Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 10:11:24AM +0100, vermaden wrote:
> network 10.0.0.0/24 is put on rl0 and 192.168.0.0/16
> is on rl1, default router is set to 10.0.0.1 on /etc/rc.conf as
> defaultrouter="10.0.0.1", the problem:
>
> When I ping some box from 10.0.0.0 network, it responds, when some
On Friday 14 December 2007, vermaden wrote:
> Hi all
> I have strange problem with default router for two diffrent networks
> put on my FreeBSD box, network 10.0.0.0/24 is put on rl0 and
> 192.168.0.0/16 is on rl1, default router is set to 10.0.0.1 on
> /etc/rc.conf as defaultrouter="10.0.0.1", the
User route add default x.x.x.x -ifp iface
On Sun, 5 Jan 2003, Lars Eggert wrote:
> On 1/5/2003 1:26 PM, randall ehren wrote:
> >
> > how can i assign the default gateway to use fxp0 instead?
>
> route delete default
> route add default A.B.C.D
>
> As described in the man page.
>
> Lars
> --
>
[ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ]
> According to your ifconfig, I believe you have essentially assigned the same
> networks to both interfaces (128.111.147.250 netmask 0x falls within
> the larger 128.111.147.251/24). In which case, there is no way to
> distinguish between
According to your ifconfig, I believe you have essentially assigned the same
networks to both interfaces (128.111.147.250 netmask 0x falls within
the larger 128.111.147.251/24). In which case, there is no way to
distinguish between the two interfaces because your default IP,
128.111.147.25
> > how can i assign the default gateway to use fxp0 instead?
>
> route delete default
> route add default A.B.C.D
i read the man page, it indicated the use of the -inteface flag but i
could not get it to work. doing what you say did not fix the problem
either:
as you described:
root@fw-1[~]%
On 1/5/2003 1:26 PM, randall ehren wrote:
how can i assign the default gateway to use fxp0 instead?
route delete default
route add default A.B.C.D
As described in the man page.
Lars
--
Lars Eggert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> USC Information Sciences Institute
smime.p7s
Description: S/MI
On Mon, Jul 09, 2001 at 11:41:37AM +0100, Brian Somers wrote:
> ifconfig(8) deletes and re-adds the given address. When the delete
> happens, the route (now) disappears.
>
> IMHO, ifconfig(8) should be smart enough to optimise out no-ops.
>
I found that using SIOCSIFADDR (though deprecated) to
On Mon, Jul 09, 2001 at 11:35:29AM +0100, Mark Blackman wrote:
>
> on FreeBSD 4.3-STABLE #1: Thu May 24 13:03:35 BST 2001
>
> Is it now standard/expected behaviour that default routes
> disappear on an IP address change even within the same netmask
> or even to the same address if the default ro
ifconfig(8) deletes and re-adds the given address. When the delete
happens, the route (now) disappears.
IMHO, ifconfig(8) should be smart enough to optimise out no-ops.
> on FreeBSD 4.3-STABLE #1: Thu May 24 13:03:35 BST 2001
>
> Is it now standard/expected behaviour that default routes
> dis
60 matches
Mail list logo
