On Monday 06 August 2001 06:55 pm, Julian Elischer wrote:
> first kldload ng_ether
Yes this does allow the mkpeer stuff work. Thanks.
- JimP
>
> On Mon, 6 Aug 2001, Jim Pirzyk wrote:
> > On Monday 06 August 2001 04:31 pm, Julian Elischer wrote:
> > > On Mon, 6 Aug 2001, Jim Pirzyk wrote:
> > >
first kldload ng_ether
On Mon, 6 Aug 2001, Jim Pirzyk wrote:
> On Monday 06 August 2001 04:31 pm, Julian Elischer wrote:
> > On Mon, 6 Aug 2001, Jim Pirzyk wrote:
> > > Ok, what I am trying to do is to follow the example on the
> > > ng_one2many man page to create a network interface that will
The recent FreeBSD advisory regarding IP fragment denial-of-service
attacks didn't mention whether or not an IP filter (ipfw or ipf) that
drops all fragments is an adequate temporary work-around or not.
Does anyone who is familiar with the problem and attack know if something
like the followin
On Mon, Aug 06, 2001 at 02:52:50PM -0700, Jim Pirzyk wrote:
> Since they do not show up on the netgraph interfaces, I would
> assume then they are not supported.
Actually, all ethernet devices are supported via the generic ethernet
code. You probably don't have ng_ether loaded.
-- Brooks
--
On Monday 06 August 2001 04:31 pm, Julian Elischer wrote:
> On Mon, 6 Aug 2001, Jim Pirzyk wrote:
> > Ok, what I am trying to do is to follow the example on the
> > ng_one2many man page to create a network interface that will
> > aggregate across my dc0 and dc1 interfaces. No where in the page
>
On Mon, 6 Aug 2001, Jim Pirzyk wrote:
>
> Ok, what I am trying to do is to follow the example on the
> ng_one2many man page to create a network interface that will
> aggregate across my dc0 and dc1 interfaces. No where in the page
> does it show you having to setup the other netgraph nodes (w
On Monday 06 August 2001 12:25 pm, Julian Elischer wrote:
> On Sun, 5 Aug 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Nope, nor does it work when I change it to dc0 (which there is a device
> > called dc0, but I though that was too confusing).
> >
> > - JimP
> >
> > > Jim Pirzyk wrote:
> > > > So I tried to
clemensF wrote:
>>Daniel C. Sobral:
>>
>
>>On http://people.freebsd.org/~dcs/ip_output.c there is a port to stable
>>of the revisions 1.127 through 1.130 of /sys/netinet/ip_output.c. These
>>
>
> i did not find it: 404.
All I can say is: duh! :-)
The correct url is:
http://peopl
Start with reading this:
http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/ipsec.html
D.
On Sun, 5 Aug 2001, Alessandro de Manzano wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 05, 2001 at 02:41:43PM +0200, David Delibasic wrote:
>
> > I'm running NFS over IPsec tunnel and it works fine..
>
> very interesting :
On Sun, 5 Aug 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Nope, nor does it work when I change it to dc0 (which there is a device
> called dc0, but I though that was too confusing).
>
> - JimP
>
> > Jim Pirzyk wrote:
> > >
> > > So I tried to use the one2many netgraph module, but I get errors
> > > righ
On Monday 06 August 2001 10:07 am, Brooks Davis wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 02, 2001 at 02:56:30PM -0700, Jim Pirzyk wrote:
> > So I tried to use the one2many netgraph module, but I get errors
> > right away. Here is what I get:
> >
> > Jim.Pirzyk@snoopy:~
> > 47>sudo ngctl -d mkpeer trnk0: one2many upp
On Thu, Aug 02, 2001 at 02:56:30PM -0700, Jim Pirzyk wrote:
> So I tried to use the one2many netgraph module, but I get errors
> right away. Here is what I get:
>
> Jim.Pirzyk@snoopy:~
> 47>sudo ngctl -d mkpeer trnk0: one2many upper one
> ngctl: sendto(trnk0:): No such file or directory
> ngctl:
On 6 Aug 2001, Kirk Strauser wrote:
>
> At 2001-08-06T15:34:44Z, Garrett Wollman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Hope you never need to communicate with anyone in the *real* .int
> > domain
>
> Why would I ever want to do that?
>
> This is offtopic, but isn't that also the recommended dom
At 2001-08-06T15:34:44Z, Garrett Wollman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hope you never need to communicate with anyone in the *real* .int
> domain
Why would I ever want to do that?
This is offtopic, but isn't that also the recommended domain for internal
networks? I was under the impress
< said:
> I'm using sendmail 8.11.5 on a FreeBSD-STABLE (4.4-PRERELEASE) system. I
> use the `.int' domain for hosts on my LAN
Hope you never need to communicate with anyone in the *real* .int
domain
-GAWollman
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-net"
Peter Pentchev wrote:
>
> On Thu, Aug 02, 2001 at 12:57:09PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> >
> > I have been combing the freebsd.org site for the last two days
> > attempting to find some documentation on how to configure and use a
> > FreeBSD server as a router. I have found some inform
> Note that the packets sent to the local IP address are not picked up by
> tcpdump. This can be tried with any traffic type, I have just used ping
> as an example.
>
> Is this the correct/desired behaviour? If it is, is there any other way
> to capture these packets?
This is the expected beha
*doh* of course... the loopback device!
thanks
Henry
On Mon, 6 Aug 2001, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
to see the packets to 192.168.2.1 you have to specify the interface lo0,
because it's your own address. Packets to this address aren't send to fxp0.
So use:
tcpdump -ni
Hi,
to see the packets to 192.168.2.1 you have to specify the interface lo0,
because it's your own address. Packets to this address aren't send to fxp0.
So use:
tcpdump -ni lo0
Martin
> Take the following example:
> # ifconfig fxp0
> fxp0: flags=8843 mtu 1500
> inet 192.168.2.1 netmas
Take the following example:
# ifconfig fxp0
fxp0: flags=8843 mtu 1500
inet 192.168.2.1 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 192.168.2.255
ether 00:90:27:94:84:34
media: Ethernet autoselect (100baseTX )
status: active
# tcpdump -ni fxp0 &
# ping 192.168.2.1
PING 192.168.2.1
matusita> 1) nsupdate can't read keyfile
I've got a reply from [EMAIL PROTECTED] that this is a bug[1] in
8.2.4; current 8.2.5-T1A and 8.3.0-T1A is already fixed.
-- -
Makoto `MAR' MATSUSHITA
Appendix:
[1] from changelog:
> 1217. [bug] #1186 broke the command-line programs that r
21 matches
Mail list logo
