Quagga OSPF binds to wrong interface on FreeBSD 7
jgreco at ns.sol.net
Tue Sep 2 16:40:19 UTC 2008
Joining this conversation as someone who's been wrestling with this issue
for some months:
> > This bug was reported around the release of FreeBSD 7, but does not seem
> > to have made any progress.
> > http://bugzilla.quagga.net/show_bug.cgi?id=420
> > Is this because the sockopt.c.diff patch is correct, which isn't entirely
> > clear from the following comments, or is there some other solution to this
> > problem? Thanks!
> You should contact with ports/net/quagga maintainer to push
> temporary patch into Ports Tree until quagga developers settle with
> something working. This always was most productive way for us.
I've been doing extremely limited testing on the sockopt.c patch, on a
7.0R box that used to have problems, and it "seems to" work. However,
the failures we were noticing seemed most frequent and catastrophic
when using a 7.0R box as a router with about a dozen interfaces active
(we got instant failures, in many/most/all?? cases). I don't have a
lab setup capable of reproducing this at the moment, and am not willing
to sacrifice production networks to the "well just try it and see"
patch testing god.
I believe the question that was asked is not the question you answered.
I, too, would like someone who can offer a knowledgeable opinion as to
the correctness of the patch. Were someone who has worked on the code,
such as Bruce, to tell me that it appeared to be the right solution, I
would be willing to risk a test on a 7.0R box known to fall over rapidly
with the multicast issue. I am certainly interested in seeing this
Until someone can either test the heck out of this, or offer a definitive
opinion of the correctness based on experience with this subsystem, it
would seem premature to ask the port maintainer to include a patch of
I have cc:'d bms@ in the hopes of bringing in such an opinion. I am not
sure who else is working on the multicast subsystem at this time, but
hopefully someone else can input if appropriate.
Knowing that the patch was correct would also provide some leverage for
those of us with interest in this code to persuade the Quagga developers
to do something about this. As it is, we're left here holding a bag of
"this patch is supposed to work but we don't really know it is correct."
So it would be really useful to have such an opinion.
Joe Greco - sol.net Network Services - Milwaukee, WI - http://www.sol.net
"We call it the 'one bite at the apple' rule. Give me one chance [and] then I
won't contact you again." - Direct Marketing Ass'n position on e-mail spam(CNN)
With 24 million small businesses in the US alone, that's way too many apples.
More information about the freebsd-net