Re: annoying bug on routing tables...

2001-01-16 Thread Archie Cobbs
Ruslan Ermilov writes: > > > Symptoms are -- if you change the address to an interface, > > > packets to destinations to which you have talked to in the past > > > will still go out with the previous address unless > > > you delete and reinstall a route for that destination. > > > > Yes. The ad

Re: annoying bug on routing tables...

2001-01-16 Thread Ruslan Ermilov
On Tue, Jan 16, 2001 at 11:30:56AM -0500, Garrett Wollman wrote: > < said: > > > Symptoms are -- if you change the address to an interface, > > packets to destinations to which you have talked to in the past > > will still go out with the previous address unless > > you delete and reinstall a rou

annoying bug on routing tables...

2001-01-16 Thread Garrett Wollman
< said: > Symptoms are -- if you change the address to an interface, > packets to destinations to which you have talked to in the past > will still go out with the previous address unless > you delete and reinstall a route for that destination. Yes. The address deletion code is supposed to mak

Re: annoying bug on routing tables...

2001-01-15 Thread itojun
>> IMHO IPv4 code is not very friendly with multiple addresses on single >> interface. i believe the following items are assumed for the use >> of rt_ifa. >but it seems that when you change interface address the call to >in_ifscrub() should take care of removing the old address...

Re: annoying bug on routing tables...

2001-01-15 Thread Luigi Rizzo
> >Any idea on where the old address is stored ? > > try using > # route -n get 10.0.0.0 > and you'll see rt_ifa holding pointer to 10.0.0.1. rt_ifa is used for > source address selection. thanks, that was it (with a -v flag to see all...) > IMHO IPv4 code is not

Re: annoying bug on routing tables...

2001-01-15 Thread itojun
>Example: >ifconfig ed0 10.0.0.1 >ping 10.0.0.20 # works fine >ifconfig ed0 10.0.0.2 >ping 10.0.0.20 # no reply, tcpdump shows traffic coming from 10.0.0.1 >route delete 10.0.0.2 >ping 10.0.0.20 # now things work as expected >So it seems that the old address is stored

Re: annoying bug on routing tables...

2001-01-15 Thread jayanth
check the arp cache. You might want to do a arp -ad and try again. jayanth Luigi Rizzo ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > There is an annoying bug in FreeBSD networking/routing which has been > around at least since 3.4. > > Symptoms are -- if you change the address to an interface, > packets to des

annoying bug on routing tables...

2001-01-15 Thread Luigi Rizzo
There is an annoying bug in FreeBSD networking/routing which has been around at least since 3.4. Symptoms are -- if you change the address to an interface, packets to destinations to which you have talked to in the past will still go out with the previous address unless you delete and reinstall