On Wed, Apr 10, 2002 at 11:06:44AM +0200, Paulius Bulotas wrote:
> Hello list,
>
> I'm seeing strange? networking behaviour with my FreeBSD server, and it
> seems that this list is tne right to ask ;)
> Suppose, there is outgoing connection for whom dynamic rule is created
> (that's how I noticed
Hi Bill,
Thanks for a hint. My network consists of three computers connected via a 10
Mbps hub. I don't think that this is a hardware problem. I never experienced
any networking problems except in this situation.
Besides, netstat shows very low number of bad segments and segment
retransmissions
On Wed, 10 Apr 2002, ipver4 wrote:
> Thanks for the explanation.
>
> It seems since version 4.4 that kernel net.inet.tcp.rfc1323 is set to 1 by
> default, thus causing all the TCP connections to use the RFC1323 extension.
>
> The effects are:
>
> 1. bigger TCP header.
> 2. more processing time a
Thanks for the explanation.
It seems since version 4.4 that kernel net.inet.tcp.rfc1323 is set to 1 by
default, thus causing all the TCP connections to use the RFC1323 extension.
The effects are:
1. bigger TCP header.
2. more processing time at sending and receiving hosts.
3. VJ TCP/IP header c
Hi all,
I want to set up a bridge with filtering function on Freebsd. I checked
some webpages which mention that I can ng_bpf to implement filtering. But
the freebsd man page of ng_bpf is not clear(especially, how to use ngctl to
configure step by step). Has anybody a sample configuration or a e
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ("ipver four") writes:
>Is there a reason for including the timestamp option on most of the TCP
>packets?
The TCP timestamp option is used to obtain better round-trip time
estimates than can be obtained without, and these estimates turn out
to be important in networks with la
Am Mi, 2002-04-10 um 17.33 schrieb Bromirski, Lukasz:
> > > 2. If not, is it possible?
> > I dunno. AFAIK, this requires L2TP to be available under FreeBSD.
>
> Why L2TP?
Okay, i misunderstood this. Our VPN Server seems to be configured to
connect only with L2TP/IPsec, but cisco websites says
> -Original Message-
> From: Tilman Linneweh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 2:57 PM
> To: Nelson, Trent .
> Cc: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> Subject: Re: Cisco VPN servers.
>
> Hi,
>
> Am Di, 2002-04-09 um 20.35 schrieb Nelson, Trent .:
> >
> > 3. Has anyone
Hi,
Am Di, 2002-04-09 um 20.35 schrieb Nelson, Trent .:
>
> Few quick questions.
>
> 1. Has anyone been able to establish a successful VPN connection
> between FreeBSD and a Cisco VPN server?
Me not, but I would like to know too, if anyone got this running.
> 2. If not,
On Wed, Apr 10, 2002 at 11:06:09PM +1000, Arkadi Kosmynin spewed forth:
> I really can not explain this. We are stress testing a server. We
> use the following configuration: the server runs on a FreeBSD box
> (or Linux, with a similar effect). A multithreaded tester program
> runs on a Win2K box
Hello people,
I really can not explain this. We are stress testing a server. We use the
following configuration: the server runs on a FreeBSD box (or Linux, with a
similar effect). A multithreaded tester program runs on a Win2K box and
emulates random multiuser activity. The FreeBSD box stops re
Hello list,
I'm seeing strange? networking behaviour with my FreeBSD server, and it
seems that this list is tne right to ask ;)
Suppose, there is outgoing connection for whom dynamic rule is created
(that's how I noticed it - ipfw logs denied packets). My 4.4-Release
FreeBSD is hostA, something o
12 matches
Mail list logo
