RE: gratuitous ARP with em interface.

• Previous message: _at_babolo.ru: "Re: ipfw rules vs routes to localhost?"
• Maybe in reply to: akanwar_at_digitarchy.com: "gratuitous ARP with em interface."
• Next in thread: Sreekanth: "RE: gratuitous ARP with em interface."
• Reply: Sreekanth: "RE: gratuitous ARP with em interface."
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

To: sreekanth@redlinenetworks.com, mvsjetti@hss.hns.com, pete@he.iki.fi, ru@freebsd.org, freebsdnic@mailbox.cps.intel.com, freebsd-net@freebsd.org, akanwar@digitarchy.com
Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 19:54:28 -0400

Thanks all for you replies.

> I haven't tried this, but I think the problem would go away if you
> changed WAIT_FOR_AUTO_NEG_DEFAULT to 0 in "if_em.h".

Changed this. Did not work.

> If u can do kernel debugging put break point at the
> "arp_ifinit" and verify if this was getting called or
> not.................. cheers, mahesh

Will try this.

> 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).

No. Spanning tree is turned off (Tried it with both IOS and Catalyst
switches).

> 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.

Correct, there is a delay. "ifconfig em0 inet x.x.x.x/y" takes a few
seconds to complete whereas "ifconfig fxp0 inet x.x.x.x/y" returns
instantly.

Is there a way to force gratituous arp ? ( Short of writing a raw socket
utility)

Thanks,
-ansh

> > >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
>
>

--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .

_______________________________________________
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"

• Previous message: _at_babolo.ru: "Re: ipfw rules vs routes to localhost?"
• Maybe in reply to: akanwar_at_digitarchy.com: "gratuitous ARP with em interface."
• Next in thread: Sreekanth: "RE: gratuitous ARP with em interface."
• Reply: Sreekanth: "RE: gratuitous ARP with em interface."
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]