RE: gratuitous ARP with em interface.

From: Sreekanth (sreekanth_at_redlinenetworks.com)
Date: 05/29/03

  • Next message: Barney Wolff: "Re: Cascading qmail servers" 
    To: <mvsjetti@hss.hns.com>
Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 09:36:27 -0700

    em_ioctl() has a call to ether_ioctl() which in turn calls arp_ifinit().

    Sreekanth

    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: mvsjetti@hss.hns.com [mailto:mvsjetti@hss.hns.com]
    > Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2003 9:17 AM
    > To: Sreekanth
    > Cc: 'Petri Helenius'; 'Ruslan Ermilov';
    > freebsdnic@mailbox.cps.intel.com; freebsd-net@freebsd.org;
    > akanwar@digitarchy.com
    > Subject: RE: gratuitous ARP with em interface.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > hi,
    > I had checked the kernel code of the freeBsd. In case of fxp
    > port " fxp_ether_ioctl" fucntional will be called when we add
    > a new address to an interface(using the if_ioctl pointer from
    > the in_ifinit fucntion). And this fuction will inturn call
    > the arp_ifinit fucntion which sends the gratituos ARP. I am
    > not able to find this kind of fucntionality for em. I am not
    > the sure whether the code i am having was incomplete or some
    > fucntonality was missing in the implementation. This may be
    > the case of incomplete intitlaization( if_ioctl of the ifp
    > may not be initlized properly).
    >
    > If u can do kernel debugging put break point at the
    > "arp_ifinit" and verify if this was getting called or
    > not.................. cheers, mahesh
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > "Sreekanth" <sreekanth@redlinenetworks.com>@freebsd.org on
    > 29/05/2003 21:01:29
    >
    > Sent by: owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org
    >
    >
    > To: "'Petri Helenius'" <pete@he.iki.fi>, "'Ruslan Ermilov'"
    > <ru@freebsd.org>
    > cc: freebsdnic@mailbox.cps.intel.com, freebsd-net@freebsd.org,
    > akanwar@digitarchy.com
    >
    > Subject: RE: gratuitous ARP with em interface.
    >
    >
    > Could be attributed to the spanning tree in the switch.I have
    > seen it happening(especially with cisco switches).I bet you
    > are not able to send out any packet(Not just Garp).
    >
    > Sreekanth
    >
    > > -----Original Message-----
    > > From: owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org
    > > [mailto:owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of Petri Helenius
    > > Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2003 4:39 AM
    > > To: Ruslan Ermilov
    > > Cc: freebsdnic@mailbox.cps.intel.com; akanwar@digitarchy.com;
    > > freebsd-net@freebsd.org
    > > Subject: Re: gratuitous ARP with em interface.
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > > I haven't looked that deep into why, but em is quite slow
    > on coming up
    > > compared to
    > > fxp for example. Probably something to do with hardware
    > > re-initialization.
    > >
    > > Pete
    > >
    > >
    > > Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
    > >
    > > >On Wed, May 28, 2003 at 07:57:07PM -0400,
    > > akanwar@digitarchy.com wrote:
    > > >
    > > >
    > > >>Hi all,
    > > >>
    > > >>Is there a known issue with alias IPs on em interfaces not
    > > sending out
    > > >>gratuitous arps ?
    > > >>
    > > >>The situation is as follows:
    > > >> I am running a custom redundancy daemon that migrates the
    > > IP address
    > > >>of a server from one interface to another in case the
    > > active network
    > > >>path fails. Till now I was experimenting with two fxp
    > > interfaces and
    > > >>everything worked perfectly. i.e. when the ip address moved over
    > > >>(using a perl script to run ifconfig commands) it sent out
    > > grat. arps
    > > >>for each of its alias IPs. This allowed the router to
    > > update its Arp
    > > >>table and talk to the newly active interface.
    > > >>
    > > >>Now when I try running the code with em (gigabit Ethernet
    > > over copper)
    > > >>NICs, I simply do not see the gratuitous arps come out of the new
    > > >>interface.
    > > >>
    > > >>I am at a loss to understand what has changed. Could it
    > be that the
    > > >>line DOWN -> UP time of the em interface is longer thereby
    > > causing a
    > > >>loss of ARPs ? Any suggestions ?
    > > >>
    > > >>
    > > >>
    > > >Yes, I can reproduce this too, no gratuitous ARP is sent.
    > > >
    > > >
    > > >Cheers,
    > > >
    > > >
    > >
    > >
    > > _______________________________________________
    > > freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
    > > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/free> bsd-net To
    > > unsubscribe, send any mail to
    > > "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
    > >
    > > ---
    > > Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
    > > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
    > > Version: 6.0.483 / Virus Database: 279 - Release Date: 5/19/2003
    > >
    > >
    >
    > _______________________________________________
    > freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
    > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/free> bsd-net
    > To
    > unsubscribe, send any mail to
    > "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
    >
    >
    > ---
    > Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
    > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
    > Version: 6.0.483 / Virus Database: 279 - Release Date: 5/19/2003
    >
    >

    _______________________________________________
    freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
    http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
    To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"

  • Next message: Barney Wolff: "Re: Cascading qmail servers"