Re: [lwip-users] lwip reply delayed after long communication idle time

[address@hidden]

Am 02.04.2020 um 10:29 schrieb Jochen Strohbeck:
> Guess that ARP_MAXAGE which is set to 20 minutes explains the first part of
> my question.

Yes.

> And scrolling thru the code I guess that there is a way to configure lwip in
> such a way that the IPs are not removed from the cache?

You can add a static entry, but I'd rather suggest to handle this
situation in a standard way: having the ARP cache time out is a standard
thing.

>
> And, after removing the IP from the cache the update of the cache (and
> sending the reply), can this behavior controlled or configured?

I'm not sure I understand the question.

>
> See the trace below.
> If I am right, the first attempt to update the cache of lwip is found in 36,
> 5 seconds later?
> And the ping reply to 28 is found at 50, 320 seconds delayed?
> Why?

I don't know. And from the lines below, I can't tell, sorry.

Regards,
Simon

>
> 28     1093.623791    192.168.0.9     192.168.0.100   ICMP    74      Echo 
> (ping) request
> id=0x0001, seq=4493/36113, ttl=128 (reply in 50)
> 29    1098.462090     Dell_7a:2c:51   de:bd:00:00:00:29       ARP     42      
> Who has 192.168.0.100?
> Tell 192.168.0.9
> :
> 36    1108.861805     de:bd:00:00:00:29       Broadcast       ARP     60      
> Who has 192.168.0.9? Tell
> 192.168.0.100
> 37    1108.861833     Dell_7a:2c:51   de:bd:00:00:00:29       ARP     42      
> 192.168.0.9 is at
> 98:e7:43:7a:2c:51
> :
> 49    1365.462423     Dell_7a:2c:51   Broadcast       ARP     42      Who has 
> 192.168.0.100? Tell
> 192.168.0.9
> 50    1413.238122     192.168.0.100   192.168.0.9     ICMP    74      Echo 
> (ping) reply
> id=0x0001, seq=4493/36113, ttl=255 (request in 28)
>
>
>
> --
> Sent from: http://lwip.100.n7.nabble.com/lwip-users-f3.html
>
> _______________________________________________
> lwip-users mailing list
> address@hidden
> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users
>