[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJFZqHyTfmvUQVAHf872_syRizxjQ6GfyWgb3nBnq0d-zQYP8A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 14:44:22 +0800
From: Li RongQing <roy.qing.li@...il.com>
To: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>
Cc: netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [bug report or not] ping6 will lost packets when ping6 lots of
ipv6 address
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 12:11 AM, Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 08:46:49PM +0800, Li RongQing wrote:
>> 1. in a machine, configure 3000 ipv6 address in one interface
>>
>> for i in {1..3000}; do ip -6 addr add 4001:5013::$i/0 dev eth0; done
>>
>>
>> 2. in other machine, ping6 the upper configured ipv6 address, then
>> lots of lost packets
>>
>> ip -6 addr add 4001:5013::0/64 dev eth0
>> for i in {1..2000}; do ping6 -q -c1 4001:5013::$i; done;
>>
>> 3. increasing the gc thresh can handles these lost
>>
>> sysctl -w net.ipv6.neigh.default.gc_thresh1=2000
>> sysctl -w net.ipv6.neigh.default.gc_thresh2=3000
>> sysctl -w net.ipv6.neigh.default.gc_thresh3=4000
>> sysctl -w net.ipv6.route.gc_thresh=3000
>> sysctl -w net.ipv6.route.max_size =3000
> Which kernel is used in this test?
all version, I think this should not a bug, this test will lead to
that the neigh number is
larger than net.ipv6.neigh.default.gc_thresh3, and can not allocate
new neigh, and ping
will lost packets.
Thanks
-Roy
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists