On 9/30/19 11:45 AM, Ben Greear wrote:
On 9/22/19 12:23 PM, David Ahern wrote:
On 9/20/19 9:57 AM, Ben Greear wrote:
On 9/10/19 6:08 PM, Ben Greear wrote:
On 9/10/19 3:17 PM, Ben Greear wrote:
Today we were testing creating 200 virtual station vdevs on ath9k,
and using
VRF for the routing.
On 9/22/19 12:23 PM, David Ahern wrote:
On 9/20/19 9:57 AM, Ben Greear wrote:
On 9/10/19 6:08 PM, Ben Greear wrote:
On 9/10/19 3:17 PM, Ben Greear wrote:
Today we were testing creating 200 virtual station vdevs on ath9k,
and using
VRF for the routing.
Looks like the same issue happens w/out
On 9/20/19 9:57 AM, Ben Greear wrote:
> On 9/10/19 6:08 PM, Ben Greear wrote:
>> On 9/10/19 3:17 PM, Ben Greear wrote:
>>> Today we were testing creating 200 virtual station vdevs on ath9k,
>>> and using
>>> VRF for the routing.
>>
>> Looks like the same issue happens w/out VRF, but there I have oo
On 9/10/19 6:08 PM, Ben Greear wrote:
On 9/10/19 3:17 PM, Ben Greear wrote:
Today we were testing creating 200 virtual station vdevs on ath9k, and using
VRF for the routing.
Looks like the same issue happens w/out VRF, but there I have oodles of routing
rules, so it is an area ripe for failure
On 9/10/19 3:17 PM, Ben Greear wrote:
Today we were testing creating 200 virtual station vdevs on ath9k, and using
VRF for the routing.
Looks like the same issue happens w/out VRF, but there I have oodles of routing
rules, so it is an area ripe for failure.
Will upgrade to 5.2.14+ and retest,
Today we were testing creating 200 virtual station vdevs on ath9k, and using
VRF for the routing.
This really slows down the machine in question.
During the minutes that it takes to bring these up and configure them,
we loose network connectivity on the management port.
If I do 'ip route show',
