2574 output packets discarded due to no route
2904 output datagrams fragmented
5808 fragments created
not incrementing..
route monitor....:
got message of size 160 on Tue Jun 24 10:59:04 2008
RTM_MISS: Lookup failed on this address: len 160, pid: 0, seq 0, errno
0, flags:<DONE>
locks: inits:
sockaddrs: <DST>
default
got message of size 160 on Tue Jun 24 10:59:04 2008
RTM_MISS: Lookup failed on this address: len 160, pid: 0, seq 0, errno
0, flags:<DONE>
locks: inits:
sockaddrs: <DST>
default
got message of size 160 on Tue Jun 24 10:59:04 2008
RTM_MISS: Lookup failed on this address: len 160, pid: 0, seq 0, errno
0, flags:<DONE>
locks: inits:
sockaddrs: <DST>
default
got message of size 160 on Tue Jun 24 10:59:04 2008
RTM_MISS: Lookup failed on this address: len 160, pid: 0, seq 0, errno
0, flags:<DONE>
locks: inits:
sockaddrs: <DST>
default
got message of size 160 on Tue Jun 24 10:59:04 2008
RTM_MISS: Lookup failed on this address: len 160, pid: 0, seq 0, errno
0, flags:<DONE>
locks: inits:
sockaddrs: <DST>
default
got message of size 160 on Tue Jun 24 10:59:04 2008
RTM_MISS: Lookup failed on this address: len 160, pid: 0, seq 0, errno
0, flags:<DONE>
locks: inits:
sockaddrs: <DST>
default
got message of size 160 on Tue Jun 24 10:59:04 2008
RTM_MISS: Lookup failed on this address: len 160, pid: 0, seq 0, errno
0, flags:<DONE>
locks: inits:
sockaddrs: <DST>
default
got message of size 160 on Tue Jun 24 10:59:04 2008
RTM_MISS: Lookup failed on this address: len 160, pid: 0, seq 0, errno
0, flags:<DONE>
locks: inits:
sockaddrs: <DST>
default
got message of size 160 on Tue Jun 24 10:59:04 2008
RTM_MISS: Lookup failed on this address: len 160, pid: 0, seq 0, errno
0, flags:<DONE>
locks: inits:
sockaddrs: <DST>
default
I don't get it.. :/ I do have a default route.. grr. :P Must be
something to do with GRE but I can't recreate it on -RELEASE, only
-STABLE and I don't see any differences in -STABLE that might cause it
except maybe the EM driver? But I don't see how that would do it..
The only difference in route.c from RELEASE to STABLE is :
- * $FreeBSD: src/sys/net/route.c,v 1.120.2.1.2.1 2008/01/09 15:23:36
mux Exp $
+ * $FreeBSD: src/sys/net/route.c,v 1.120.2.3 2008/03/05 20:33:46 jhb Exp $
*/
#include "opt_inet.h"
@@ -396,7 +396,7 @@
error = EHOSTUNREACH;
done:
if (rt)
- rtfree(rt);
+ RTFREE_LOCKED(rt);
out:
if (error)
rtstat.rts_badredirect++;
Hrm.. what's a good way to disable the RT_MISS messages .. I guess ill
have to add a check to see if msgtype=RTM_MISS and bypass the
reporting... Is there a way to make it report what the source ip address
it is trying to find a route for?
Thanks
Paul
Bruce M. Simpson wrote:
Paul wrote:
Get these with GRE tunnel on
FreeBSD 7.0-STABLE FreeBSD 7.0-STABLE #5: Sun May 11 19:00:57 EDT
2008 :/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/ROUTER amd64
But do not get them with 7.0-RELEASE
Any ideas what changed? :) Wish there was some sort of changelog..
# of messages per second seems consistent with packets per second on
GRE interface..
No impact in routing, but definitely impact in cpu usage for all
processes monitoring the route messages.
RTM_MISS is actually fairly common when you don't have a default route.
Messages which get enqueued don't necessarily get delivered -- and
very few processes actually listen to the routing socket actively like
this, so I wouldn't worry about it.
If it's a real concern for you then you could try hacking in a sysctl
to tell the radix trie code not to issue RTM_MISS messages on the
routing socket.
_______________________________________________
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
_______________________________________________
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
