Re: Sendmail outgoing bind() fails on PPP
>Well, I have had the same problem. The solution was in removing IPv6 >support. I have not done any futher investigations. please file a bug report to sendmail.org. itojun To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
Ioctl
Hi, Ihave a doubt regarding if->if_ioctl. My doubt is with reference to ipv6. Whenever a solicited node multicast address is formed it is put the multicast address list by calling in6_addmulti(). The in6_addmulti in turn calls if_addmulti() ( net/if.c ). The if addmulti after putting the address to the ifnet ifmultiaddr (multicast address list) call ifp->if_ioctl. My doubt is about ifp->if_ioctl in general. The above thing is an example. My doubt is a) Under what circumstances this ioctl needs to be called. b) Whether after each ip addresses are put to the ifnet structure's ip list ifp->if_ioctl needs to be called. c)Whether after any modifications that are done to the ifnet structure this ifp->if_ioctl needs to be called. Kindly mail me regading this ifioctl in detail. Regards ravi prasad __ Get your own FREE, personal Netscape Webmail account today at http://webmail.netscape.com/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
Re: forerunner LE drive
> I have some NICs Forerunner LE 25 and I need a drive for Freebsd, does > Anyone know where I can find it? ftp://ftp.cs.ndsu.nodak.edu/pub/freebsd/atm/nicstar.tgz Others discovered that the NICStAR runs out of large buffers with Fore Switches running SPANS protocol. Another person found it to be that the SPANS protocol PDUs do not not send end of packet flag. It is my belief that the SPANS VCC (0/14 and/or 0/15 ?) should be set for Raw cell (or AAL0) processing and not AAL5. The above driver supports Raw cell processing, but it has not been enabled on those VCC in the driver. --mark tinguely. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
if_simloop() and BPF
BPF handling in if_simloop() is broken for every use except for from looutput(). Why? BPF write: BPF writes go through if_output, and if_simloop() is not an if_output routine. This code should be in looutput(). BPF tap: if_simloop() prepends the header that BPF expects when it's capturing on a DLT_NULL interface. This is only correct behavior when the interface being looped is a DLT_NULL interface type, which is pretty rare. In addition, it's often not appropriate to tap a copy of the packet that is going through if_simloop(), e.g. looping back a broadcast on a simplex link -- bpf is going to see the output copy as well. I summarized each caller to if_simloop() and its behavior at: http://people.freebsd.org/~fenner/if_simloop_callers.html . The No/No/No lines are obvious, they don't want the bpf_tap at all. The Yes/No/No lines point at problems that the current if_simloop() doesn't handle, and we need more infrastructure to deal with it. Right now, I'm tempted to move the BPF tap back to looutput() also, which fixes the cases where the if_simloop() caller sholdn't have the copy sent to bpf, and breaks all of the already-broken cases where if_simloop()'s caller wants the copy sent to bpf but that copy will almost definitely have the wrong header prepended. Another option is to add a few more arguments to if_simloop(), indicating things like tap or don't, and what the BPF header should look like if you tap. Note that netatalk/ddp_output.c would have trouble coming up with that, unless it was simply a property of the interface. Any comments? Thanks, Bill P.S. Historically, callers to looutput() got their packets bpf'd on the loopback interface. Thus they would show up on the wrong and somewhat unexpected interface, but their BPF headers would be right. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
Solution: Sendmail outgoing bind() fails only PPP
I found the bug. The socket was IPv6, but the bind used an IPv4 sockaddr
struct. Patch attached.
Sean
---
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
PGP key: http://www.farley.org/~sean/pgp.key
--- daemon.c.orig Fri Apr 27 14:27:51 2001
+++ daemon.cFri Apr 27 14:28:14 2001
@@ -2012,7 +2012,7 @@
}
else
{
- s = socket(addr.sa.sa_family, SOCK_STREAM, 0);
+ s = socket(clt_addr.sa.sa_family, SOCK_STREAM, 0);
}
if (s < 0)
{
Re: maxing out the 100Mb TX (full duplex)
On 27 Apr, Jonathan Fortin wrote: = Hello, = = You can do etherchannel on freebsd with ng_one2many. Man it for more = information, but briefly, = = It is used to load balance incoming and outgoing data in a round robin = fashion across the interfaces that are added on the "hook". Ok, the switch does support EtherChannel (calling it "aggregation"). Now, should we try the wpaul's fec or the ng_one2many? And what's the difference? Thanks a lot for your time, gentlemen! -mi To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
Re: Sendmail outgoing bind() fails on PPP
Hello, On Fri, 27 Apr 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >Well, I have had the same problem. The solution was in removing IPv6 > >support. I have not done any futher investigations. > > please file a bug report to sendmail.org. It seems Sean Farley has already done the patch. Thank you Sean. > itojun - -maxim -- Maxim Konovalov, MAcomnet, Internet-Intranet Dept., system engineer phone: +7 (095) 796-9079, mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
Re: number of interfaces and performance ?
Alfred Perlstein writes: > > I have the need to put together a somewhat largish VLAN router (larger than > > I have done before) with about 35 interfaces. Has anyone put anything like > > this together ? The box would be routing about 25-30Mb at peak rate. I > > recall reading something about LINUX being very inefficient when it comes > > to multiple interfaces. Does FreeBSD suffer from the same fate ? I also > > recall someone running into problems with 16 physical interfaces (4 x 4 > > multiport nics). Not sure how much of that was an hardware resource issue > > and how much a software resource issue . Will it work OK in theory, or > > should I spend the $8K on a 3640 ? The largest I have right now is one with > > 8 active VLANs and it works very well, but nothing over 10 and nothing > > pushing 30+. I have built the box and it works well enough in the lab, but > > I dont know of course how it will work in production. > > I remeber there being some sort of issue with large number of > interfaces, however I think it was trivial to fix and may have > already been. Sorry if this isn't so helpful, but I can't remeber > anyone recently popping up and complaining about the perf with > lotsa NICs in machine. I have machine vith 18 running interfaces, most of them VLAN interfaces, but there are some LAN and WAN. It successful transfer about 60-80Mbit/s (~90 in peak). Most of traffic goes throug Intel EtherExpress ethernet NICs. For VLANs I use patch to allow passing IP packets 1500byte size. Even not tried to use zero-copy network patches, may be it will grow preformance. This router have more than 20K interrupts per second, so picture on 'systat -vm' 1 looks like: 2.3%Sys 34.4%Intr 3.1%User 0.0%Nice 60.3%Idl Besides doing ip-forwarding and ipfw-firewalling, router do full-traffic accounting dividing all traffic into categories got from FullView BGP table. CPU: Pentium III/Pentium III Xeon/Celeron (799.62-MHz 686-class CPU) Origin = "GenuineIntel" Id = 0x686 Stepping = 6 > -Alfred Perlstein - [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Daemon News Magazine in your snail-mail! http://magazine.daemonnews.org/ -- TSB Russian Express, Moscow Vladimir B. Grebenschikov, [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
