Re: Bridging and 'pseudo-device tap' and PPPoE
> > I've used bridging with tap devices plenty. Works fine for me. > >What bridging method do you use with tap device ? >option BRIDGE in kernel method OR netgraph bridging method? Netgraph bridging. > > TAP devices don't actually work unless there's a process that has the > /dev/ entry > > opened and reads from it (well, they'll buffer a little). > >So, just let a process like "cat /dev/tap0" read the tap device, I >assume. Yup, should work. Greets, Doc To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
Re: FreeBSD-4.3 IPv6 bug
>From: Kris Kennaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: June Carey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: FreeBSD-4.3 IPv6 bug >Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 15:26:45 -0800 > >Can you please: > >a) Test under a more recent version of FreeBSD: bugs are continually >being fixed, and this may have already been taken care of if it is >indeed an OS bug. I'm sorry, I haven't got FreeBSD-4.4 and haven't got the resources to get it. Perhaps someone can provide me with a FreeBSD-4.4 shell account on the internet ? I saw no mention of this "bug" being fixed in the RELEASE NOTES for FreeBSD-4.4 > >b) Provide source code exhibiting the problem, and send it to the >[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list, which is a more appropriate list for >discussion of this problem. Well, the source code is semi-proprietary, in the sense that I was going to release it under a BSD license as an Open Source Project, but haven't got around to doing so yet. Again, if any kind soul "out there" could help me out with a shell account on a development machine, that would make a difference. Cheers, Robin Carey. > >Kris ><< attach3 >> _ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
Re: FreeBSD-4.3 IPv6 bug
On Sun, Jan 06, 2002 at 03:56:04PM +, June Carey wrote: > >From: Kris Kennaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >To: June Carey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Subject: Re: FreeBSD-4.3 IPv6 bug > >Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 15:26:45 -0800 > > > >Can you please: > > > >a) Test under a more recent version of FreeBSD: bugs are continually > >being fixed, and this may have already been taken care of if it is > >indeed an OS bug. > > I'm sorry, I haven't got FreeBSD-4.4 and haven't got the resources to get > it. Perhaps someone can provide me with a FreeBSD-4.4 shell account on the > internet ? > > I saw no mention of this "bug" being fixed in the RELEASE NOTES for > FreeBSD-4.4 "Minor" bugs don't tend to get mentioned - there are literally hundreds of them fixed between every release. The IPv6 code is also developed externally by the KAME project, so we don't even directly see in the FreeBSD commit logs all of the bugfixes which were made by the KAME developers between imports into FreeBSD (though they are of course available in the KAME repository). > >b) Provide source code exhibiting the problem, and send it to the > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list, which is a more appropriate list for > >discussion of this problem. > > Well, the source code is semi-proprietary, in the sense that I was going to > release it under a BSD license as an Open Source Project, but haven't got > around to doing so yet. Well then, write up a small test application which does the same thing as the part of your proprietary code which is failing, and which demonstrates the condition you're showing. So far you haven't given enough information to diagnose the problem. Kris msg04643/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Descriptions of SEQPACKET and RDM protocols?
Hi, I'm looking for papers or documentation describing SEQPACKET or RDM protocols. I see that there is a SEQPACKET protocol under the NS domain which I could just read but a paper would be best to start with. Web searches have not turned up much that is of use. Thanks, George To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
name resolution problems and "full socket buffers"
-- I can't seem to get name resolution working correctly. According to sniffer output, the dns query goes out fine and the response comes back just fine. However, my machine then replies to the dns server with an ICMP "port unreachable message"... regardless of the ephemeral port used by my machine as the source port for the dns query. nestat -s also shows the following udp counters incrementing: "x dropped due to no socket" "y dropped due to full socket buffers" The output of "sysctl -a", for the relevant variables, seems fine... when compared to that of another machine which is working correctly. I can ping ip addresses just fine, however because name-resolution is broken, there isn't a whole lot of "networking" going on. There are no firewalls configured on the broken system. Any help or pointers would be greatly appreciated. thanks, Rach To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
multi-NIC broadcasting: it isn't
4.4-20020101-STABLE with 5 nics ifconfig_fxp0="inet 10.1.1.1 netmask 255.255.255.0 media autoselect" ifconfig_fxp1="inet 10.1.2.1 netmask 255.255.255.0 media autoselect" ifconfig_fxp2="inet 192.168.253.59 netmask 255.255.255.0 media autoselect" ifconfig_fxp3="inet 10.1.4.1 netmask 255.255.255.0 media autoselect" ifconfig_fxp4="inet 10.1.5.1 netmask 255.255.255.0 media autoselect" we can ping from a PC on net 10.1.5.0/24 to a PC on net 10.1.1.0/24, so box as gateway and routing are working. then send broadcasts from the PC on 10.1.5.0/24 to these ports: 255.255.255.255 port 26790 255.255.255.255 port 26791 255.255.255.255 port 26792 255.255.255.255 port 26793 trafshow indicates that broadcasts originate on 10.1.5.0/24, but nothing appears on the other nets. Suggestions where to look? Len http://MenAndMice.com/DNS-training http://BIND8NT.MEIway.com : ISC BIND 8.2.4 for NT4 & W2K http://IMGate.MEIway.com : Build free, hi-perf, anti-abuse mail gateways To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
Re: name resolution problems and "full socket buffers"
On Sun, Jan 06, 2002 at 05:22:00PM -0800, Rachel Leising wrote: > > -- > I can't seem to get name resolution working correctly. > > According to sniffer output, the dns query goes out fine and the > response comes back just fine. However, my machine then replies to > the dns server with an ICMP "port unreachable message"... regardless > of the ephemeral port used by my machine as the source port for the > dns query. Could you post the actual tcpdump(1) output, # tcpdump -vvvn 'udp && port 53' Just in case you are missing something. > nestat -s also shows the following udp counters incrementing: > > "x dropped due to no socket" This is what I would expect for what you describe... > "y dropped due to full socket buffers" H... Could we double-check the firewall issue, $ sysctl net.inet.ip.fw.enable net.inet.ipf.fr_running And see the full output of, $ netstat -s -p udp $ netstat -an -p udp $ host testhost# your DNS test here $ netstat -s -p udp $ netstat -an -p udp -- "It's always funny until someone gets hurt. Then it's hilarious." Crist J. Clark | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://people.freebsd.org/~cjc/| [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
Re: multi-NIC broadcasting: it isn't
On Sun, Jan 06, 2002 at 09:29:42PM -0600, Len Conrad wrote: > 4.4-20020101-STABLE with 5 nics > > ifconfig_fxp0="inet 10.1.1.1 netmask 255.255.255.0 media autoselect" > ifconfig_fxp1="inet 10.1.2.1 netmask 255.255.255.0 media autoselect" > ifconfig_fxp2="inet 192.168.253.59 netmask 255.255.255.0 media autoselect" > ifconfig_fxp3="inet 10.1.4.1 netmask 255.255.255.0 media autoselect" > ifconfig_fxp4="inet 10.1.5.1 netmask 255.255.255.0 media autoselect" > > we can ping from a PC on net 10.1.5.0/24 to a PC on net 10.1.1.0/24, so box > as gateway and routing are working. > > then send broadcasts from the PC on 10.1.5.0/24 to these ports: > > 255.255.255.255 port 26790 > 255.255.255.255 port 26791 > 255.255.255.255 port 26792 > 255.255.255.255 port 26793 > > trafshow indicates that broadcasts originate on 10.1.5.0/24, but nothing > appears on the other nets. > > Suggestions where to look? Uh, nowhere? That is the required behavior. 255.255.255.255 is the _local_ broadcast address. It never crosses a router. -- "It's always funny until someone gets hurt. Then it's hilarious." Crist J. Clark | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://people.freebsd.org/~cjc/| [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
