weird problem with 9.0 Release and ed0
Ian Smith
smithi at nimnet.asn.au
Sat Aug 11 07:58:20 UTC 2012
In freebsd-questions Digest, Vol 427, Issue 6, Message: 16
On Fri, 10 Aug 2012 12:39:36 +0200 "Christoph P.U. Kukulies" <kuku at kukulies.org> wrote:
> Am 10.08.2012 11:40, schrieb Christoph P.U. Kukulies:
> > Am 10.08.2012 11:28, schrieb Christoph P.U. Kukulies:
> >> The problem need not to be confined to 9.0. It stated to develop
> >> under 5.1 already.
> > read: started to develop...
> >>
> >> I'm running a natd gateway machine that was developing strange
> >> behaviour such that the
> >> outside interface (ed0, BNC connector) that was connected via a small
> >> media converter switch to
> >> the providers sync line had dropouts. The machine couldn't ping into
> >> the Internet and also couldn't be pinged.
> >>
> >> I first thought it was the switch/media converter, but another
> >> (Windows XP) machine that was on the
> >> same BNC cable worked flawlessly.
That XP box was directly on the outside, not inside nat'd via this one?
> >> So I decided to migrate that 5.1 machine to a 9.0 machine. The
> >> situation now is that I have the9.0 machine
> >> at the BNC cable and simultanously the old FreeBSD 5.1 gateway on the
> >> same BNC cable but through a
> >> TP adapter. This was the old machine works fine and I can care about
> >> the new machine.
Not quite clear .. can you sketch your network configuration?
> >> Is there a known problem with ed0 cards that have the Realtek 8029
> >> chipset. Do they need some
> >> special flags like memory mapping or irq?
Long time since I've run anything with 10base2/BNC, but it used to work
ok, on an ed0.
> >> When I for example boot the 9.0 machine the comping up of the em0 (on
> >> mainboard interface results in a highlighted
> >> kernel message on the console. The coming up of the ed0 is not
> >> flagged this way. And as a result the
> >> ed0 interface seems to be dead.
Does the outside interface have a static address, or do you use DHCP
via the provider's switch/hub/whatever? Show /etc/rc.conf setup. It
smells a bit like the interface may not be up soon enough at that time;
the ntpd message below could also indicate something like that re ipv6.
> >> Here some excerpts of dmesg:
> >> em0: <Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Connection 7.2.3> port 0x4400-0x441f
> >> mem 0x93100000-0x9311ffff,0x93124000-0x93124fff irq 20 at device 25.0
> >> on pci0
> >> em0: Using an MSI interrupt
> >> em0: Ethernet address: 00:1c:c0:37:b2:9f
> >>
> >> ed0: <RealTek 8029> port 0x1000-0x101f irq 22 at device 1.0 on pci7
> >> ed0: Ethernet address: 00:e0:7d:7c:2b:4a
> >>
> >> I also see this:
> >> Jul 30 23:03:54 forum ntpd[1711]: unable to create socket on ed0 (20)
> >> for fe80::
> >> 2e0:7dff:fe7c:2b4a#123
You should get more / better clues if you boot with verbose messages.
> > Forgot to add this info:
> >
> > ed0: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> metric 0 mtu 1500
> > ether 00:e0:7d:7c:2b:4a
> > inet 80.72.44.230 netmask 0xfffffff0 broadcast 80.72.44.239
> > inet6 fe80::2e0:7dff:fe7c:2b4a%ed0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0xa
> > nd6 options=29<PERFORMNUD,IFDISABLED,AUTO_LINKLOCAL>
> > media: Ethernet autoselect (10base2/BNC)
> >
>
> Must add some more info:
>
> My kernel config:
>
> cpu I486_CPU
> cpu I586_CPU
> cpu I686_CPU
> ident DIVERT
>
> makeoptions DEBUG=-g # Build kernel with gdb(1) debug
> symbols
> options IPFIREWALL
> options IPFIREWALL_VERBOSE
> options IPFIREWALL_VERBOSE_LIMIT=10
> options IPDIVERT
> options IPFIREWALL_DEFAULT_TO_ACCEPT
>
> (the rest like in GENERIC).
Just to mention: you don't actually need to include FIREWALL* or DIVERT
in kernels these days; a GENERIC kernel will work fine, loading modules
as needed. Only exception is if you needed FIREWALL_FORWARD, which it
appears you don't.
> Strange thing:
>
> I cannot ping neither the outside interface address nor the inside
> (172.27.2.115)
>
> --
> Christoph Kukulies
Please show output from:
# egrep 'ifconfig|firewall|natd|gateway|ntpd' /etc/rc.conf
# cat /etc/natd.conf
# ipfw show
# netstat -finet -rn
cheers, Ian
More information about the freebsd-questions
mailing list