On Fri, May 24, 2002 at 10:31:54AM -0700, Julian Elischer wrote:
> some comments..
>
> 1/ it may be more useful to not make any distinction between
> 'in' and 'out' hooks but just have connections..
> The hooks could be given purely arbitrary names
> e.g. "source1" and "suspicious"
> a hook could
< said:
> out of the box. Ideally, I would like applications sending packets to the
> interface to block when the outgoing queue is full.
No Can Do. The network stack is not prepared to block at all, ever.
-GAWollman
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-n
your default gateway should be on a directly connected network; 10.0.2.1 is
not in 10.0.1.0/24 and so your machine doesn't know how to get to it -- your
default gateway needs to be of the form 10.0.1.x, probably 10.0.1.1
Aditya
On Sat, May 25, 2002 at 09:36:17AM -0700, Vinod wrote:
> i had some
i had some problems with a script of mine.
#!/bin/sh
ifconfig wi0 10.0.1.5 netmask 255.255.255.0
route delete default
route add default 10.0.2.1
i get a host 10.0.2.1 unreachable message when i run
this script.then i put the ifconfig in a seperate
script and ran it first and then the route co
netgraph can do this for you...
On Fri, 24 May 2002, Henry Fung wrote:
> Is there any module or well-known mechanism available
> for punting a data link layer PDU to a user process?
> Also for sending out PDUs?
> Say I'd like to implement ARP as a user process, or
> some other protocols.
> T
On Fri, 24 May 2002, Archie Cobbs wrote:
> I'm trying to debug a mbuf corruption bug in the kernel. I've added
> an mbuf sanity check routine which calls panic() if anything is amiss
> with the mbuf free list, etc. This function runs at splimp() and if/when
> it calls panic() the cpl is still at
