On 2001-Feb-23 10:52:17 +0100, "Pedro J. Lobo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Fri, 23 Feb 2001, Peter Jeremy wrote:
>> - VLAN support in driver modules for the above drivers
>
>Including fxp? My code only supports vlan in modules for the 558 and 559
>controllers, not for the old 557.
I suspect no
Adrian Penisoara wrote:
> Hi,
>
> As we are facing a heavy fragments attack (40-60byte packets in a
> ~ 1000 pkts/sec flow) I see some sporadic panics. Kernel/world is
> 4.2-STABLE as of 18 Jan 2001 -- it's a production machine and I
hadn't yet
> the chance for another update; if it's been fix
Steve,
It is the order of initialization that causes this to happen. vlaninit
happens before the hooks to ng_ether_attach_p are set. vlaninit is doing
ether_ifattach, but without the hooks being called.
Later on the first attempt to sent something (ARP) the code assumes
ng_ether_attach has been
On Sun, Feb 25, 2001 at 04:46:47PM +0100, Peter Blok wrote:
> The panic occurs in ng_ether_output, during the ifconfig of the first vlan
> interface. It is coming from SIOCSIFADDR. It tries to do an arp request. The
> reason of the the panic is NULL pointer to the netgraph structure. I am not
> a
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED]> you write:
>We recently introduced a check for tcp sequence numbers when processing
>ICMP messages, it has so far only been used for the ICMP messages that
>trigger the session to be dropped, but it makes sense to have this check
>for all ICMP messages which only act
src/sys/netinet/in_pcb.c:in_pcblookup() currently do a linear search of
all sessions, below is a diff that use in_pcblookup_hash instead, this
should minimize the impact of a ICMP flood.
please review.
/Jesper
Index: in_pcb.c
===
R
We recently introduced a check for tcp sequence numbers when processing
ICMP messages, it has so far only been used for the ICMP messages that
trigger the session to be dropped, but it makes sense to have this check
for all ICMP messages which only act on a single session.
diff below, please revi
Hi,
As we are facing a heavy fragments attack (40-60byte packets in a
~ 1000 pkts/sec flow) I see some sporadic panics. Kernel/world is
4.2-STABLE as of 18 Jan 2001 -- it's a production machine and I hadn't yet
the chance for another update; if it's been fixed in the mean time I would
be glad
On Sat, 24 Feb 2001 12:13:03 EST, Mike Tancsa wrote:
> At 11:17 AM 2/24/2001 -0500, C. Stephen Gunn wrote:
>
> >2/3 of our traffic started showing up on the wrong logical network.
>
> How did you work around it ? Or were you able to ?
We had to disable CEF on those subnets. Or only have two v
On Sun, Feb 25, 2001 at 09:23:55AM -0600, Jonathan Lemon wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 24, 2001 at 11:56:18PM +0100, Jesper Skriver wrote:
> > jesper@tam% time telnet 195.41.23.1
> > Trying 195.41.23.1...
> > telnet: connect to address 195.41.23.1: No route to host
> > telnet: Unable to connect to remote h
The panic occurs in ng_ether_output, during the ifconfig of the first vlan
interface. It is coming from SIOCSIFADDR. It tries to do an arp request. The
reason of the the panic is NULL pointer to the netgraph structure. I am not
an expert to this code, but I believe this should have been done in
ng
On Sat, Feb 24, 2001 at 11:56:18PM +0100, Jesper Skriver wrote:
> jesper@tam% time telnet 195.41.23.1
> Trying 195.41.23.1...
> telnet: connect to address 195.41.23.1: No route to host
> telnet: Unable to connect to remote host
> 0.000u 0.020s 0:00.70 2.8% 88+164k 0+0io 12pf+0w
>
> But that
On Sun, Feb 25, 2001 at 11:10:54AM +0100, Paul Herman wrote:
> On Sat, 24 Feb 2001, Jonathan Lemon wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Feb 24, 2001 at 11:19:02AM -0800, Mark Peek wrote:
> > > Was there ever a final resolution to this problem?
> >
> > The patches are still sitting in my tree, as I've been unable
I'm sorry. I don't know what went wrong. Here it is again.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
Julian Elischer
Sent: Sunday, February 25, 2001 07:07
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: 'Stefan Arentz'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: netgraph pptp and
On Sat, 24 Feb 2001, Jonathan Lemon wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 24, 2001 at 11:19:02AM -0800, Mark Peek wrote:
> > Was there ever a final resolution to this problem?
>
> The patches are still sitting in my tree, as I've been unable
> to come up with a test case that actually makes a difference.
>
> The
15 matches
Mail list logo