On Sat, Apr 06, 2002 at 01:57:44PM -0600, Nick Rogness wrote:
> On Fri, 5 Apr 2002, Matthew D. Fuller wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Apr 05, 2002 at 06:48:09PM -0600 I heard the voice of
> > Nick Rogness, and lo! it spake thus:
> > > On Fri, 5 Apr 2002, Alex Rousskov wrote:
> > > >
> > > > - Is it
On Fri, Apr 05, 2002 at 09:35:17AM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hi all...
>
> I'd really appreciate a hint or two on this.
>
> I'm having problems deciding on the 'best way' for this one...
>
> I have a freebsd 4.2 firewall machine built and have it plugged into
> both a dsl modem with st
On Sat, Apr 06, 2002 at 06:57:36AM -0800, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 02, 2002 at 06:39:12PM +0200, Andreas Klemm wrote:
>
> we would need a minor tweak to the ipfw code so that it can match
> packets whose size is less than X bytes (so the mechanism is general
> enough to be used for other
On Sat, 6 Apr 2002, Nick Rogness wrote:
> I had a brief thought of using an upstream device that could route
> the appropriate nat'd addresses to each interface.
This is not an option, unfortunately. The required functionality has
to be implemented inside one PC (appliance). No exter
On Sat, Apr 06, 2002 at 04:44:32PM -0800, Julian Elischer wrote:
> Please excuse the comment if I'm way off the mark..
>
> With a VERY BRIEF look I see that you are returning a void
> from the destroy function and it is callled from the module unload code
> where some destroy functions used to re
Please excuse the comment if I'm way off the mark..
With a VERY BRIEF look I see that you are returning a void
from the destroy function and it is callled from the module unload code
where some destroy functions used to return ints.
this ia I think a BAD MOVE..
a driver must be able to veto it'
On Sat, 6 Apr 2002, Nick Rogness wrote:
> On Fri, 5 Apr 2002, Matthew D. Fuller wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Apr 05, 2002 at 06:48:09PM -0600 I heard the voice of
> > Nick Rogness, and lo! it spake thus:
[missing stuff]
I missed the original mailling..
what was the requirement?
To Unsubscribe: sen
Barney Wolff wrote:
>
> Think about using vmware?
along the same line, but without any outside software : from my
experience, I'm sure you can do it with jail(8) with the creation of two
jails, one NIC per jail and one sender/emitter in each jail.
(there are lots of papers on how to setup a jai
Think about using vmware?
--
Barney Wolff
I never met a computer I didn't like.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
On Fri, 5 Apr 2002, Matthew D. Fuller wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 05, 2002 at 06:48:09PM -0600 I heard the voice of
> Nick Rogness, and lo! it spake thus:
> > On Fri, 5 Apr 2002, Alex Rousskov wrote:
> > >
> > > - Is it possible without kernel modifications? How?
> >
> > AFAIK, No. Your only 2 p
On Tue, Apr 02, 2002 at 06:39:12PM +0200, Andreas Klemm wrote:
we would need a minor tweak to the ipfw code so that it can match
packets whose size is less than X bytes (so the mechanism is general
enough to be used for other things). This could be done in a matter
of 1hour or less, most of the t
Hi !
A collegue of mine has an Apple (Mac OS X) and told me about
a cool software, that priorizes outgoing ACKs over other traffic.
Apple MacOS X application, see:
http://www.intrarts.com/quest/throttle.html
Using DSL you have usually 768K in and 128K out.
Figure a szenario, where you
Hi !
A collegue of mine has an Apple (Mac OS X) and told me about
a cool software, that priorizes outgoing ACKs over other traffic.
On Tue, Apr 02, 2002 at 04:53:08PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> http://www.intrarts.com/quest/throttle.html
Using DSL you have usually 768K in and 128K out.
F
Terry Lambert wrote:
> I thought about this for a while, after Bruce said he was
> looking into it.
>
> There are some implicit problems that I don't know if it's
> really possible to resolve satisfactorily.
>
> If you drop fragments for whatever reason, in order to prevent
> overflow, just random
On Sat, Apr 06, 2002 at 10:09:01AM +0200, Barry Irwin wrote:
> Hi All
>
> After mucking around on a firewall problem on the other side of the world
> yesterday, the problem was that net.inet.ip.forwarding was set to off * the
> gateway_enable had been mangled in rc.conf). Packets were being rece
15 matches
Mail list logo
