[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: strange observations on network configuration (ifconfig&routing)
I did try that efore an verified it again. Now routed attempts to
install a local route
for the lo0 interface and fill the log with the EEXIST messages.
That's why I went for LLDATA in order to avoid to analyse routed's inner
Maybe we need a different test for ignoring kernel routing messages.
Here is he error message from the log:
2016-12-12T09:08:06.522364+01:00 pip routed 10002 - - write(rt_sock)
RTM_ADD 127.0.0.1/32 -->127.0.0.1 metric=0 flags=0: File exists
Here is the trace for the failed route insert attempt:
Tracing actions started
Tracing packets started
Tracing packet contents started
Tracing kernel changes started
Add interface lo0 127.0.0.1 -->127.0.0.1/32 <LOOPBACK> <PASSIVE>
Add interface wm1 10.200.1.2 -->10.200.1.0/24 <RIPV2>
turn on RIP
Add 10.200.1.0/24 -->10.200.1.2 metric=0 wm1 <IF>
Add 127.0.0.1/32 -->127.0.0.1 metric=0 lo0 <IF>
Send mcast RIPv2 REQUEST to 126.96.36.199.520 via wm1
write(rt_sock) RTM_ADD 127.0.0.1/32 -->127.0.0.1 metric=0 flags=0:
-- 09:08:06 --
The other part of of the path (not deleting loopback routes for local
On 12/12/16 01:36, Ryota Ozaki wrote:
Thank you for the investigation.
On Sun, Dec 11, 2016 at 9:08 PM, Frank Kardel <kardel%netbsd.org@localhost> wrote:
Reverting that change (1.24->1.25) and using RTF_LLDATA instead of
RTF_LLINFO seems to solve the problem.
Is this correct or am I overlooking something?
Local routes aren't actually link-layer routes; RTF_LLDATA remain in them
for backward compatibility, IIRC. So as you said if old routed works on
a new kernel, I think it is good to fix routed as I proposed in my earlier
Could you try the patch?
Main Index |
Thread Index |