On Fri, 2 Mar 2001, Hyunseog Ryu wrote:
>
> Hi, folks
>
> I have questions for BIND version 9.1.1rc2.
> I submitted original question to [EMAIL PROTECTED],
> but couldn't get an answer for this.
You're not getting answers because you are sending to the wrong
lists. Your question belon
On Fri, 2 Mar 2001, Wes Peters wrote:
> Paulo Fragoso wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I've written a little server using perl, it's working fine using FBSD 4.x
> > but when I try with FBSD 3.x it don't work:
> >
> > bind: Can't assign requested address at ...
> >
> > I've ever changed all /usr/lib
>> if you are using dynamic IP address assigned from upstream provider,
>> maybe try to talk with freenet6 guys so that they'd give you
>> subnets...
>Don't your ISP assign prefix using DTCP (Dynamic Tunnel Configuration
>Protocol)? I believe IIJ is good location. ;-)
I gu
Paulo Fragoso wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I've written a little server using perl, it's working fine using FBSD 4.x
> but when I try with FBSD 3.x it don't work:
>
> bind: Can't assign requested address at ...
>
> I've ever changed all /usr/libdata/perl directory to same used on FBSD
> 4.x, but I've go
> On Fri, 02 Mar 2001 20:47:54 +0900
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
itojun> if you are using dynamic IP address assigned from upstream provider,
itojun> maybe try to talk with freenet6 guys so that they'd give you
itojun> subnets...
Don't your ISP assign prefix using D
Hi, folks
I have questions for BIND version 9.1.1rc2.
I submitted original question to [EMAIL PROTECTED],
but couldn't get an answer for this.
Recently I installed BIND 9.1.1rc2 into one of FreeBSD 4.2-stable
version.
After installation of BIND, it works fine for a while.
But when I loo
< said:
> If a UDP socket selects readable, am I assured that the next read
> call will not block?
Not in the general case. If you can be certain that there is no other
process with a file handle on the same socket, and considering
blocking only due to socket buffer exhaustion, then that assump
< said:
> I really need to get myself up to date on IPv6, but is it still possible
> to do NAT like stuff with IPv6 though?
It should not be necessary. 6to4 provides a convenient alternative
that's available to anyone with an IPv4 address. One problem is the
lack of reverse-mapping support in
Harti Brandt wrote:
>
> On Thu, 1 Mar 2001, Julian Elischer wrote:
>
> JE>> MM>timers, buffers, retransmissions and friends.
> JE>
> JE>you can certainly do that in netgraph.
> JE>there are issues with locking in that a timer must not jump into a node while
> JE>the node is locked, but there is
>I really need to get myself up to date on IPv6, but is it still possible
>to do NAT like stuff with IPv6 though?
you shouldn't need to. this is just a freenet6's restriction that
it does not give you subnets instead of /128 host address.
if you have a permanent IPv4 add
On Thu, 1 Mar 2001, Julian Elischer wrote:
JE>> MM>timers, buffers, retransmissions and friends.
JE>
JE>you can certainly do that in netgraph.
JE>there are issues with locking in that a timer must not jump into a node while
JE>the node is locked, but there is a method for doing that. I will be ad
-On [20010301 17:24], Hajimu UMEMOTO ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>> On 27 Feb 2001 13:53:39 -0600
>> Kirk Strauser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>kirk> I want this machine to be a IPv6 gateway for the other machines
>kirk> on my LAN, too.
>
>Since Freenet6 serve only one host address, it is imp
If a UDP socket selects readable, am I assured that the next read call will not
block?
If a socket is nonblocking, can I use setitimer and handle SIGALRM, and be
assured that the process will not be put to sleep waiting for I/O on the socket,
thus returning EINTR due to the signal?
--
Jonathan G
hello there!
[ please keep CC'ing me ]
I need to setup the following network:
net A --+
| --> ISP 1
v/
(if1)GATEWAY(if2)--> ISP 2
^^ \
||--> ISP n
net B --+|
net C--
14 matches
Mail list logo
