On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 9:52 PM, Alexander V. Chernikov < melifaro_at_freebsd.org> wrote: > > Could you show 'netstat -rn' output when one of bridge members is down? > Btw, I tried to reproduce it today (but, with ix0 instead of wlan0) and I > wasn't able to trigger the problem. > > Sure, here some output with the re1 (member of bridge) unplugged: root_at_ fbsd-router :~ # ifconfig bridge0 bridge0: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> metric 0 mtu 1500 ether 02:6b:c0:de:b8:00 inet 1.1.1.1 netmask 0xffffff00 broadcast 1.1.1.255 nd6 options=9<PERFORMNUD,IFDISABLED> groups: bridge id 00:00:00:00:00:00 priority 32768 hellotime 2 fwddelay 15 maxage 20 holdcnt 6 proto rstp maxaddr 2000 timeout 1200 root id 00:00:00:00:00:00 priority 32768 ifcost 0 port 0 member: wlan0 flags=143<LEARNING,DISCOVER,AUTOEDGE,AUTOPTP> ifmaxaddr 0 port 5 priority 128 path cost 33333 member: re1 flags=143<LEARNING,DISCOVER,AUTOEDGE,AUTOPTP> ifmaxaddr 0 port 2 priority 128 path cost 55 root_at_ fbsd-router :~ # ifconfig re1 re1: flags=8943<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,PROMISC,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> metric 0 mtu 1500 options=82099<RXCSUM,VLAN_MTU,VLAN_HWTAGGING,VLAN_HWCSUM,WOL_MAGIC,LINKSTATE> ether 00:0d:b9:3c:ae:25 nd6 options=29<PERFORMNUD,IFDISABLED,AUTO_LINKLOCAL> media: Ethernet autoselect (none) status: no carrier root_at_ fbsd-router :~ # netstat -r 4 n Routing tables Internet: Destination Gateway Flags Netif Expire 1.0.0.0/24 link#1 U re0 1.0.0.1 link#1 UHS lo0 1.1.1.0/24 link#6 U bridge0 1.1.1.1 link#6 UHS lo0 127.0.0.1 link#4 UH lo0 During this "one-member-unplugged", the freebsd-router can still ping each hosts on different connected interface, it just "refuse" to forward between its interfaces: root_at_fbsd-router:~ # ping 1.1.1.2 (the wireless client connected to wlan0, member of the bridge0 interface) PING 1.1.1.2 (1.1.1.2): 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 1.1.1.2: icmp_seq=0 ttl=64 time=4.600 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.2: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=5.878 ms ^C --- 1.1.1.2 ping statistics --- 2 packets transmitted, 2 packets received, 0.0% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 4.600/5.239/5.878/0.639 ms root_at_fbsd-router:~ # ping 1.0.0.2 (an host on the LAN0) PING 1.0.0.2 (1.0.0.2): 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 1.0.0.2: icmp_seq=0 ttl=64 time=0.282 ms 64 bytes from 1.0.0.2: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.280 ms ^C --- 1.0.0.2 ping statistics --- 2 packets transmitted, 2 packets received, 0.0% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 0.280/0.281/0.282/0.001 ms root_at_fbsd-router:~ # arp -na ? (1.1.1.1) at 02:6b:c0:de:b8:00 on bridge0 permanent [bridge] ? (1.1.1.2) at 00:c0:ca:7e:8b:fe on bridge0 expires in 1055 seconds [bridge] ? (1.0.0.1) at 00:0d:b9:3c:ae:24 on re0 permanent [ethernet] ? (1.0.0.2) at 0c:c4:7a:6b:a6:d3 on re0 expires in 1106 seconds [ethernet] And the wireless client (1.1.1.2) can still ping the fbsd-router bridge interface (1.1.1.1) too (for answering to the Adrian question). Now I replug re1: root_at_fbsd-router:~ # ifconfig re1 re1: flags=8943<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,PROMISC,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> metric 0 mtu 1500 options=82099<RXCSUM,VLAN_MTU,VLAN_HWTAGGING,VLAN_HWCSUM,WOL_MAGIC,LINKSTATE> ether 00:0d:b9:3c:ae:25 nd6 options=29<PERFORMNUD,IFDISABLED,AUTO_LINKLOCAL> media: Ethernet autoselect (1000baseT <full-duplex,master>) status: active and here are netstat output (no changes with previous): root_at_fbsd-router:~ # netstat -r4n Routing tables Internet: Destination Gateway Flags Netif Expire 1.0.0.0/24 link#1 U re0 1.0.0.1 link#1 UHS lo0 1.1.1.0/24 link#6 U bridge0 1.1.1.1 link#6 UHS lo0 127.0.0.1 link#4 UH lo0 Because you didn't reach to reproduce with ix0 in place of wlan0, I've did some modification to my bridge setup: 1. In place of using re1+wlan0, I've put re1+re2 in the bridge0. And I've connected an host on re2: I didn't reach to reproduce the problem too, then I confirm we didn't have this bug with 2 Ethernet Interfaces. 2. In place of using PCI ath(4) (Atheros 9280), I've plugged an USB rum(4) (old Ralink) and configured it as wlan0 like was the ath0: the bridge0 was reverted to re1+wlan0. And I reach to reproduce the problem with a different wireless card: This thread seems correctly belong to the "wireless" mailing-list :-)Received on Tue Jan 12 2016 - 21:01:06 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:41:02 UTC