Re: -current kernel + -7 userland + carp + ipf = failure

[Stephen Borrill <netbsd%precedence.co.uk@localhost>]

On Fri, 12 May 2017, Hauke Fath wrote:
> On Fri, 12 May 2017 08:33:57 +0100 (BST), Stephen Borrill wrote:
> > xennet0: flags=8963<UP,BROADCAST,NOTRAILERS,RUNNING,PROMISC,SIMPLEX>
> > xennet0: flags=8963<MULTICAST> mtu 1500
> > 	capabilities=2800<TCP4CSUM_Tx,UDP4CSUM_Tx>
> > 	enabled=0
> > 	ec_capabilities=1<VLAN_MTU>
> > 	ec_enabled=0
> > 	address: d6:41:19:58:cc:d5
> > 	inet6 fe80::d441:19ff:fe58:ccd5%xennet0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x2
> > carp0: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> mtu 1500
> > 	capabilities=2800<TCP4CSUM_Tx,UDP4CSUM_Tx>
> > 	enabled=0
> > 	carp: MASTER carpdev xennet0 vhid 1 advbase 1 advskew 0
> > 	address: 00:00:5e:00:01:01
> > 	inet 192.168.1.88 netmask 0xffffff00 broadcast 192.168.1.255
> >
> > If I configure an IP address directly on xennet0 it works.
>
> My understanding is that, behind a system of smoke and mirrors, carp
> will add the primary address of a set of redundant machines in a subnet
> as an alias to the active machine's interface. This appears to require
> that the interface is configured. I have not checked whether you could
> get away with rfc1918 addresses as primary addresses on the interfaces;
> otherwise, it's (1 + # of machines) ip addresses per subnet.

You don't need to do any of the above. A single shared IP on carpX is 
sufficient; no IP address is required on the base interface.

To confirm, my complaint here is that while the configuration works fine 
in -7, with a -current kernel it does not.

--
Stephen