From nobody Mon Jul 01 23:16:07 2024 X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4WChkD056zz5QRlY for ; Mon, 01 Jul 2024 23:16:20 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mike@jellydonut.org) Received: from mail-ed1-x530.google.com (mail-ed1-x530.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::530]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "WR4" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4WChkC5BcQz4LYF for ; Mon, 1 Jul 2024 23:16:19 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mike@jellydonut.org) Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; none Received: by mail-ed1-x530.google.com with SMTP id 4fb4d7f45d1cf-57d106e69a2so1251292a12.0 for ; Mon, 01 Jul 2024 16:16:19 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=jellydonut.org; s=google; t=1719875778; x=1720480578; darn=freebsd.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=f+qheWM2OcjBZlqdN+RayWwxRN2OWkYmvCYG2kW+So8=; b=XwtDf75Bjp6cBIRoJ9ccO3sowmOg1roz9iPSnD43yvQ9buGqYUvbDoRk97QyXWJgld Jr+CpVSsVunnP3QP1OWnldUMqUKvdCFCKKPSymE9BMdJIbsZuVVFmRUtqlXnkYJKNyuy bJRmmlgcul/qtm8UPz2c8T30rFylks5mCY9fA= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1719875778; x=1720480578; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=f+qheWM2OcjBZlqdN+RayWwxRN2OWkYmvCYG2kW+So8=; b=N1yErACQCNoNg5ZEv/sUHrZSII99QlTUhjjAl7UhqbDGsHO5ub/SH4yUCBACPrC6xt Umpqe9JBUc8Bs0dmqSkjzeiCFrjbU8jLP4HNXqL+jBSFaYgQz5efwOghfzwcigaIZ+Ta P52dGsO1EBqY8+kcDmi/K+Yg5D0iezaOfHWadTszXtT0L6+Wg4dGhB4/nF+0g9A/3bOk 1DxFHP9AG9fjMKpf5AHXaOm2MIkoI8hC8XNCjpcfElkxnSyADGJeBDnq6SXgBt0zeXRO m/llkXoVQjtQrpGFP6gi2c8ix9IE6I74jixOvXWKKA2NpXUqGuCdyahcPQdB8ctOXPcK uEnw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yx1tRdXsfVYk4rqWxjqJ9QTeb6NVnCK54SqNSBrFebkOzoxuvEu 4AVWHAKRO4nT4Bctl0DYyy6kIGQUBywqTErTae2HKNV0UbGNbWmO/BmhDe4TTSON+8/nEZP29SO QL+3mdMN/g5U/wVxJvX+4PiXo8q3RfiKLwWgYccX2o9LQvyE= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFVDaz7rJw2gVb1B4t6YHf1X9MvYxbEZTz6RmUYT184azXvZHXLDd324r5uQhGoSB/gYXZzvvwrCj5z5VGGqHA= X-Received: by 2002:aa7:c883:0:b0:57d:1595:f6fd with SMTP id 4fb4d7f45d1cf-5865da42a7fmr6754053a12.18.1719875778315; Mon, 01 Jul 2024 16:16:18 -0700 (PDT) List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-stable List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <086405e2-8fc2-4463-b8bb-d6c652745ae1@freebsd.org> <7005d0ed-70ea-4c70-ac61-2a12e023cdd7@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <7005d0ed-70ea-4c70-ac61-2a12e023cdd7@freebsd.org> From: Michael Proto Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2024 19:16:07 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: FreeBSD 14.x localhost source address To: Craig Leres Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spamd-Bar: ---- X-Rspamd-Pre-Result: action=no action; module=replies; Message is reply to one we originated X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.00 / 15.00]; REPLY(-4.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:15169, ipnet:2a00:1450::/32, country:US] X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4WChkC5BcQz4LYF On Mon, Jul 1, 2024 at 7:04=E2=80=AFPM Craig Leres wrot= e: > > On 7/1/24 15:53, Michael Proto wrote: > > What netmask are you using for 127.0.0.2? I'd treat it as I would an > > IP alias (only on localhost) with a /32 netmask, should keep it > > isolated. Just tried it myself on a test box and iperf works as > > expected, using 127.0.0.1 as the source when connecting. > > I was just looking at that and I used 127.0.0.2 without an explicit mask > and the system picked /24. I'm not sure why I did it that way but it's > been awhile. > > I just got rid of lo2 and made 127.0.0.2/32 an alias on lo0 and it seems > to work better all around. > > I guess the overlap between 127.0.0.0/8 and 127.0.0.0/24 was problematic. > > Craig Yep, most network stacks I'm familiar with will pick the more-specific route when given two options like that, hence the use of 127.0.0.2 as the source. Glad its working now. -Proto