Perhaps someone can explain what seems to me to be some strange operation in the ARP cache on at least 1 XP pro client:
While reviewing some network logs on a minor broadcast storm, I noticed that many clients were asking for an arp resolution for our router within a few second period.
I grabbed one of the clients involved and looked at its arp table. The default gateway's address was not in the arp table.
I pinged to force a packet to the router, and the gateway entry was cached - just like you'd expect.
BUT, less than 3 minutes later it was gone again!
I repeated the test and got the same results - including the entry dropping out in <3mins.
I repeated the test again, but this time used googles IP address rather than domain name. This time, the GW address didn't even cache!
This seems most confusing. I checked the NetBT timeout entry in the registry and it was at its usual 10 mins - I expanded it to 20 with no change in the above tests.
The DNS server for the client is on the same subnet as the client so resolving should not force a request for the GW address.
Can anyone explain what is going on here? It is not at all the behaviour I expect with ARP.
Thanks!
While reviewing some network logs on a minor broadcast storm, I noticed that many clients were asking for an arp resolution for our router within a few second period.
I grabbed one of the clients involved and looked at its arp table. The default gateway's address was not in the arp table.
I pinged to force a packet to the router, and the gateway entry was cached - just like you'd expect.
BUT, less than 3 minutes later it was gone again!
I repeated the test and got the same results - including the entry dropping out in <3mins.
I repeated the test again, but this time used googles IP address rather than domain name. This time, the GW address didn't even cache!
This seems most confusing. I checked the NetBT timeout entry in the registry and it was at its usual 10 mins - I expanded it to 20 with no change in the above tests.
The DNS server for the client is on the same subnet as the client so resolving should not force a request for the GW address.
Can anyone explain what is going on here? It is not at all the behaviour I expect with ARP.
Thanks!