On Wed, 19 Dec 2001, Mike Tancsa wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Dec 2001 11:50:03 -0800 (PST), in sentex.lists.freebsd.net you
> wrote:
>
> >I believe you can bridge a vlan interface if you use the new upcoming
> >netgraph vlan node. It shuold be committed soon. (Vlans done the way it
> >should have been
On Wed, 19 Dec 2001 11:50:03 -0800 (PST), in sentex.lists.freebsd.net you
wrote:
>I believe you can bridge a vlan interface if you use the new upcoming
>netgraph vlan node. It shuold be committed soon. (Vlans done the way it
>should have been done ;-)
What advantage does this method have ?
---M
On Thu, Dec 20, 2001 at 12:50:39AM +0300, Yar Tikhiy wrote:
>
> Source routing itself is a Bad Thing, as is TELNET or rlogin.
Telnet with Kerberos or other security options can be a fine thing.
--
Ben
"An art scene of delight
I created this to be ..." -- Sun Ra
To Unsubscribe:
Morning,
On 00:35+0300, Dec 20, 2001, Yar Tikhiy wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 19, 2001 at 08:54:50PM +0300, Maxim Konovalov wrote:
> >
> > By the way, is it correct to forward the packet with incorrect ip
> > options? Now we do not.
>
> No RFC seems to specify that particularly. However, RFC 1812 read
On Wed, Dec 19, 2001 at 10:32:42PM +0100, Wilko Bulte wrote:
> >
> > First of all we should decide what IPSTEALTH is for. Is it just a
> > Ruslan's net.inet.ip.decttl or it should really stealth the fact of
> > the routing? If the latter how do we behave in source routing case?
>
> I would assum
On Wed, Dec 19, 2001 at 08:54:50PM +0300, Maxim Konovalov wrote:
>
> By the way, is it correct to forward the packet with incorrect ip
> options? Now we do not.
No RFC seems to specify that particularly. However, RFC 1812 reads
in general:
(1) A router MUST verify the IP header, as describe
On Wed, Dec 19, 2001 at 07:23:55PM +0300, Maxim Konovalov wrote:
>
> Hello Yar,
>
> On 18:19+0300, Dec 19, 2001, Yar Tikhiy wrote:
>
> > Hi there,
> >
> > I ran into an absolutely clear, but year-old PR pointing out that
> > a router in the IPSTEALTH mode will reveal itself when processing
> >
I believe you can bridge a vlan interface if you use the new upcoming
netgraph vlan node. It shuold be committed soon. (Vlans done the way it
should have been done ;-)
Julian
On Wed, 19 Dec 2001, Graham Dunn wrote:
> I sent this to -questions, and the response was "no, you can't bridge a vlan
I sent this to -questions, and the response was "no, you can't bridge a vlan
interface."
So I guess the question is now, how can I improve the design?
The situation:
Lan extension, vlan1 (10.5.0.0/16) and external IP block, vlan0
(x.x.x.x/27) arrive over a 802.1q interface (fxp0). I need to con
Hi Ruslan,
You've been near this code recently. Do you have any suggestions for
how this may work?
Joe
On Tue, Dec 11, 2001 at 12:35:04PM +0800, Yusuf Goolamabbas wrote:
> 4.4-stable box
>
> netstat -i shows the number of packets and number of errors
> sent/received via the IPkt/Ierrs/Opkts/
On Wed, Dec 19, 2001 at 08:54:50PM +0300, Maxim Konovalov wrote:
> On 19:49+0300, Dec 19, 2001, Yar Tikhiy wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Dec 19, 2001 at 07:23:55PM +0300, Maxim Konovalov wrote:
> > >
> > > > I ran into an absolutely clear, but year-old PR pointing out that
> > > > a router in the IPSTEALT
On 19:49+0300, Dec 19, 2001, Yar Tikhiy wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 19, 2001 at 07:23:55PM +0300, Maxim Konovalov wrote:
> >
> > > I ran into an absolutely clear, but year-old PR pointing out that
> > > a router in the IPSTEALTH mode will reveal itself when processing
> > > IP options: kern/23123.
> > >
On Wed, Dec 19, 2001 at 05:33:13PM +0200, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 19, 2001 at 06:19:29PM +0300, Yar Tikhiy wrote:
> >
> > I ran into an absolutely clear, but year-old PR pointing out that
> > a router in the IPSTEALTH mode will reveal itself when processing
> > IP options: kern/23123.
On Wed, Dec 19, 2001 at 07:23:55PM +0300, Maxim Konovalov wrote:
>
> > I ran into an absolutely clear, but year-old PR pointing out that
> > a router in the IPSTEALTH mode will reveal itself when processing
> > IP options: kern/23123.
> >
> > The fix proposed seems clean and right to me: don't do
On Wed, Dec 19, 2001 at 07:23:55PM +0300, Maxim Konovalov wrote:
>
> Hello Yar,
>
> On 18:19+0300, Dec 19, 2001, Yar Tikhiy wrote:
>
> > Hi there,
> >
> > I ran into an absolutely clear, but year-old PR pointing out that
> > a router in the IPSTEALTH mode will reveal itself when processing
> >
Hello Yar,
On 18:19+0300, Dec 19, 2001, Yar Tikhiy wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> I ran into an absolutely clear, but year-old PR pointing out that
> a router in the IPSTEALTH mode will reveal itself when processing
> IP options: kern/23123.
>
> The fix proposed seems clean and right to me: don't do IP
On Wed, Dec 19, 2001 at 06:19:29PM +0300, Yar Tikhiy wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> I ran into an absolutely clear, but year-old PR pointing out that
> a router in the IPSTEALTH mode will reveal itself when processing
> IP options: kern/23123.
>
> The fix proposed seems clean and right to me: don't do I
On Wed, 19 Dec 2001, Yar Tikhiy wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> I ran into an absolutely clear, but year-old PR pointing out that
> a router in the IPSTEALTH mode will reveal itself when processing
> IP options: kern/23123.
>
> The fix proposed seems clean and right to me: don't do IP options
> at all wh
Hi there,
I ran into an absolutely clear, but year-old PR pointing out that
a router in the IPSTEALTH mode will reveal itself when processing
IP options: kern/23123.
The fix proposed seems clean and right to me: don't do IP options
at all when in the IPSTEALTH mode. Does anyone have objections?
19 matches
Mail list logo
