Time Issue on OpenBSD 4.2 with rc.69 (Was: Re: Sparc64 OpenBSD4.1 Compile issue)

[Eric Pancer]

On Thu, 2008-02-07 at 20:10:28 -0500, Carter Bullard proclaimed...

> If you think that its the clients, then reading the same records on  
> another machine
> may give you good times.  If so, then we may have a packing problem.
> check to see if reading records from other servers, using clients on  
> those
> machines give you good times.  and of course if you have a 32bit machine
> that could attach to any of these other probes, that may show where the
> problem is.

Ok, more research has yielded this not to be a sparc64 issue. This is on
OpenBSD 4.2 on i386 compiled with .debug and .devel. Also, I checked from
here to a remote sparc64 server (and vice versa) and the same problem
exists.

$ date
Thu Feb  7 23:56:57 CST 2008
$ uname -a
OpenBSD bob 4.2 GENERIC#375 i386
$ ra -n -S 10.15.223.177
1970-01-01 08:41:1  e         tcp    10.15.223.223.3953      ?> 10.15.223.28.22            1         60   CON
1970-01-08 17:41:2  *         llc     0:d:29:4b:c:25.66        -> 1:80:c2:0:0:0.66            1         60   INT
1970-01-06 22:53:5  e         tcp    10.15.223.177.22415     -> 10.15.223.28.561           1         78   REQ
1970-01-06 22:57:1  e         tcp     10.15.223.28.561       -> 10.15.223.177.22415         1         78   ACC
1970-01-06 23:00:2  e         tcp    10.15.223.177.22415     ?> 10.15.223.28.561           1         66   CON
1970-01-08 02:20:0  e         tcp     10.15.223.28.561       ?> 10.15.223.177.22415         1        194   CON
1970-01-08 04:31:2  e         tcp    10.15.223.177.22415     ?> 10.15.223.28.561           1         73   CON
1970-01-08 17:41:5  *         llc     0:d:29:4b:c:25.66        -> 1:80:c2:0:0:0.66            1         60   INT
1970-01-10 11:02:3  e         tcp     10.15.223.28.561       ?> 10.15.223.177.22415         1         66   CON
1970-01-10 11:09:4  e         tcp     10.15.223.28.561       ?> 10.15.223.177.22415         1        162   CON
1970-01-01 04:46:2  e         tcp    10.15.223.177.22415     ?> 10.15.223.28.561           1         66   CON


How can we move into the future? :-)

- Eric