Re: Restructuring ARP cache

[christos%astron.com@localhost (Christos Zoulas)]

In article <55F295E0.7070805%marples.name@localhost>,
Roy Marples  <roy%marples.name@localhost> wrote:
>On 11/09/2015 02:52, Christos Zoulas wrote:
>> On Sep 11,  9:26am, ozaki-r%netbsd.org@localhost (Ryota Ozaki) wrote:
>> -- Subject: Re: Restructuring ARP cache
>> 
>> | > 192.168.2.4        00:1e:4f:c0:0c:44  UHLl        -        -      -  lo0
>> | >
>> | > This should be bge0 on my machine not lo0. It used to be correct.
>> | 
>> | It was lo0 before the ARP changes. I've checked that with a kernel built
>> | at Aug 18. I guess it's changed when introducing RTF_LOCAL?
>> 
>> Could be! I'll look into it more :-) Roy???
>
>The lower l shows that it's an ARP address for a IP address on a local
>interface, so going by lo0 makes sense as it won't be leaving the
>network anyway.
>Besides, I didn't actually make that change, it's always been lo0 from
>memory. Here's the output from a -7 machine which lacks RTF_LOCAL:
>10.73.2.2          80:ee:73:04:74:ce  UHLc        -        -      -  lo0
>
>However, there is a new issue in current where the same route is added
>correctly initally:
>10.73.2.34         00:21:6b:ad:ab:38  UHLl        -        -      -  lo0
>
>but after removing the IP address via ifconfig, checking the route has
>gone and re-adding the address, the route now looks like this:
>10.73.2.34         link#2             UHLl        -        -      - iwn0
>
>That is a regression because there is no LL address. Ideally it should
>be going via lo0 as well but that's a minor nit at this point.

On a machine that has static address configuration and does not use
dhcpcd I have:

X.Y.Z.16      A:B:C:f4:e1:80  UHLc        -        -      -  bnx0
X.Y.Z.17      A:B:C:15:ca:e4  UHLc        -        -      -  lo0
X.Y.Z.18      A:B:C:15:ca:e4  UHLc        -        -      -  lo0
X.Y.Z.62      E:F:G:5f:38:fc  UHLc        -        -      -  bnx0

62 is the gateway, 16 is the interface address and the other two were added
by arp. What is the correct behavior? What we have now seems inconsistent.

christos