On 10/29/15 9:42 AM, Eric van Gyzen wrote: > On 10/29/2015 11:25, Bryan Drewery wrote: >> # ifconfig >> igb0: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> metric 0 mtu 1500 >> >> options=403bb<RXCSUM,TXCSUM,VLAN_MTU,VLAN_HWTAGGING,JUMBO_MTU,VLAN_HWCSUM,TSO4,TSO6,VLAN_HWTSO> >> ether c8:0a:a9:04:39:78 >> inet 10.10.0.7 netmask 0xffff0000 broadcast 10.10.255.255 >> inet 10.10.7.2 netmask 0xffff0000 broadcast 10.10.255.255 >> inet 10.10.0.9 netmask 0xffff0000 broadcast 10.10.255.255 >> nd6 options=23<PERFORMNUD,ACCEPT_RTADV,AUTO_LINKLOCAL> >> media: Ethernet autoselect (1000baseT <full-duplex>) >> status: active >> >> # ifconfig igb0 inet 10.10.0.9 -alias >> # arp -an|grep 10.10.0.9 >> ? (10.10.0.9) at c8:0a:a9:04:39:78 on igb0 permanent [ethernet] >> # arp -d 10.10.0.9 >> arp: writing to routing socket: Operation not permitted >> >> I swear this is not normal. I'm on an older build as well, r288951. > > That definitely looks abnormal. See what "route get" says. I think > that's the error you get when there is a route for that address. > # netstat -rn|grep 10.10.0.9 # route get 10.10.0.9 route to: lapbox destination: 10.10.0.0 mask: 255.255.0.0 fib: 0 interface: igb0 flags: <UP,DONE,PINNED> recvpipe sendpipe ssthresh rtt,msec mtu weight expire 0 0 0 0 1500 1 0 # route get 5.5.5.5 route to: 5.5.5.5 destination: default mask: default gateway: router.asus.com fib: 0 interface: igb0 flags: <UP,GATEWAY,DONE,STATIC> recvpipe sendpipe ssthresh rtt,msec mtu weight expire 0 0 0 0 1500 1 0 For more context, this current system had 10.10.0.9 added to it. I started up a VM which also started using 10.10.0.9 and managed to "win" on the local network for owning it. (I don't know arp and this stuff well). I then came to this system to remove the alias and the arp entry to allow me to connect from it and have gotten into this situation. -- Regards, Bryan DreweryReceived on Thu Oct 29 2015 - 15:46:38 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:41:00 UTC