* Julian Elischer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020712 00:00] wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 11 Jul 2002, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> >
> > That's true, but could someone explain how one can safely and
> > effeciently manipulate such a structure in an SMP environment?
>
> what does NetBSD do for that?
They don't!
On Thu, 11 Jul 2002, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
>
> That's true, but could someone explain how one can safely and
> effeciently manipulate such a structure in an SMP environment?
what does NetBSD do for that?
> I'm not saying it's impossible, I'm just saying it didn't seem
> intuative to me back
Anyone have any success with creating a ipsec tunnel between a freebsd
gateway and a WatchGuard Firebox? It looks like I'm getting past
authentication. I can't tell if the tunnel is actually getting created, but
I certainly cannot move traffic through it.
James.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EM
* Archie Cobbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020711 22:30] wrote:
> Bosko Milekic writes:
> > > mbufs that referred to the same object were linked together.
> > > I forget the details exactly. maybe someone else can remember..
> > > it did it without ref counts somehow..
> >
> > Yes, this is in NetBSD s
This is the script I use to accomplish this. Just substitute the network
card interface code with the one you wish to have renewed.
I run this every 24 hours, and have been able to keep the same IP address
for going on 6 months now. It also generates a handy Email to root when
run from /etc/
Bosko Milekic writes:
> > mbufs that referred to the same object were linked together.
> > I forget the details exactly. maybe someone else can remember..
> > it did it without ref counts somehow..
>
> Yes, this is in NetBSD still and it is very elegant. I remember
> looking at this a long ti
* Bosko Milekic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020711 19:28] wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jul 11, 2002 at 04:10:32PM -0700, Julian Elischer wrote:
> > Don't forget that "external" does not neccesarily mean "cluster".
> > I still consider the method used in (hmm was it NetBSD or OSF/1?)
> > to be very good..
> >
> >
Perhaps it might have something to do with disk sector size and
memory page size and BUFSIZ all being powers of 2? :)
On Thu, Jul 11, 2002 at 10:34:46PM -0400, Kelly Yancey wrote:
> ... that for better or worse userland apps think that
> using power-of-2 write buffers will improve performance.
I'm sorry. I should have waited before hitting the "send" button.
I've had a long and [shitty] day and I shouldn't have blew it off here.
Sorry.
--
Bosko Milekic
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of
On Thu, 11 Jul 2002, Bosko Milekic wrote:
> First of all, I'm not "blowing off" anyone's comments. I don't
> appreciate the fact that you're eagerly instructing me to "not blow off
> comments" (which I didn't do to begin with) without providing any more
> constructive feedback.
>
> All I p
On Thu, Jul 11, 2002 at 04:10:32PM -0700, Julian Elischer wrote:
> Don't forget that "external" does not neccesarily mean "cluster".
> I still consider the method used in (hmm was it NetBSD or OSF/1?)
> to be very good..
>
> mbufs that referred to the same object were linked together.
> I forget
On Thu, Jul 11, 2002 at 07:31:17PM -0400, Kelly Yancey wrote:
> > This is a good observation if we're going to be doing benchmarking,
> > but I'm not sure whether the repercussions are that important (unless,
> > as I said, there's a lot of applications that send exactly 8192
> > byte chu
On Thu, 11 Jul 2002, Bosko Milekic wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jul 11, 2002 at 01:56:08PM -0700, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
> > example: userland does an 8KB write, in the old case this requires
> > 4 clusters, with the new one you end up using 4 clusters and stuff
> > the remaining 16 bytes in a regular mbuf, t
On Thu, 11 Jul 2002, Bosko Milekic wrote:
>
> Well, I can use a different map, I guess (I use a different map for
> mbufs in order to not let huge cluster allocations eat up all of the
> address space reserved for mbufs). However, it seems that jumbo bufs
> and clusters are logically
On Thu, 11 Jul 2002, Bosko Milekic wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jul 11, 2002 at 11:00:56PM +0200, Juan Francisco Rodriguez Hervella wrote:
> > First of all, let me say that Im newbie with these topics,
> > I only know a bit about mbufs, but I dont understand how
> > can an application trim away the ref
Ahhh, ok, I misunderstood the first mail :)
Thanks.
On Thu, 11 Jul 2002, Bosko Milekic wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jul 11, 2002 at 11:00:56PM +0200, Juan Francisco Rodriguez Hervella wrote:
> > First of all, let me say that Im newbie with these topics,
> > I only know a bit about mbufs, but I dont un
On Thu, Jul 11, 2002 at 04:59:26PM +0200, Juan Francisco Rodriguez Hervella wrote:
>
> I'm very confused with the sysctl internals.
>
> For example, looking at the kernel source code of FreeBSD, I've realized
>
> of the following:
>
> netinet/in_proco.c:
> SYSCTL_NODE(_net_inet6, I
On Thu, Jul 11, 2002 at 11:00:56PM +0200, Juan Francisco Rodriguez Hervella wrote:
> First of all, let me say that Im newbie with these topics,
> I only know a bit about mbufs, but I dont understand how
> can an application trim away the refcount if the size is
> MCLBYTES = 2040 - sizeof(refcoun
On Thu, Jul 11, 2002 at 01:56:08PM -0700, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
> example: userland does an 8KB write, in the old case this requires
> 4 clusters, with the new one you end up using 4 clusters and stuff
> the remaining 16 bytes in a regular mbuf, then depending on the
> relative producer-consumer spe
On Thu, 11 Jul 2002, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
> Hi,
>
> certainly removing the malloc will improve performance a lot.
>
> As I already mentioned to Bosko, in principle the available area
> in ext.buffers is irrelevant, and i do not believe this will break
> anything (and if it does, it will be easy
On Thu, Jul 11, 2002 at 04:42:25PM -0400, Bosko Milekic wrote:
...
> > and trimming away the refcount area might easily result in suboptimal
> > allocation of storage within the kernel.
>
> Can you elaborate on the sub-optimal performance comment with,
> perhaps, an example? I'm sorry but I'
On Thu, Jul 11, 2002 at 01:38:02PM -0700, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
> Hi,
>
> certainly removing the malloc will improve performance a lot.
>
> As I already mentioned to Bosko, in principle the available area
> in ext.buffers is irrelevant, and i do not believe this will break
> anything (and if it do
Hi,
certainly removing the malloc will improve performance a lot.
As I already mentioned to Bosko, in principle the available area
in ext.buffers is irrelevant, and i do not believe this will break
anything (and if it does, it will be easy to fix in the kernel),
but some applications might decid
On Thu, 11 Jul 2002, Alex Dyas wrote:
> The only clue I've managed to find as to what is going on is in a tcpdump of
> the session (attached). The trigger for the lock up seems to be a messages
> from the Otherbox machine setting the window size to 0 :
>
> 10:41:38.614141 otherbox.foo.com.telne
Hi,
Right now, in -CURRENT, there is this hack that I introduced that
basically just allocates a ref. counter for external buffers attached
to mbufs with malloc(9). What this means is that if you do something
like allocate an mbuf and then a cluster, there's a malloc() call that
is ma
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED]> you write:
>
>Hi,
>
>I've been using dsniff on 4.6-Stable (and earlier) for a while. I've setup
>a faster machine to run this in the lab. This machine however has an
>built-in xl interface. Things don't work.
>
>The 'old' machine on the same hub works just fine. I
Not sure if you've found this already. One thing I used to do on an
older box was a simple cron job that ran a script which HUP'd the
dhclient every so often thus effectively renewing the lease...
If memory serves me it went something like
#!/bin/sh
kill -HUP `ps ax |awk '/dhclien
* Andrew Gallatin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020711 11:32] wrote:
>
> Alfred Perlstein writes:
> > Some time ago I noticed that there appeared to be several members
> > of struct socket that were either only used by listen sockets or
> > only used by data sockets.
> >
> > I've taken a stab at uni
Mike Silbersack writes:
>
> Speaking of competition, someone should go look at this:
>
> http://mail-index.netbsd.org/current-users/2002/07/03/0011.html
>
Its very worthwhile. Tru64 has had this for years. I think there may
be a Jeff Mogul paper on it somewhere (but I don't have time t
Alfred Perlstein writes:
> Some time ago I noticed that there appeared to be several members
> of struct socket that were either only used by listen sockets or
> only used by data sockets.
>
> I've taken a stab at unionizing the members and we wind up saving
> 28 bytes per socket on i386,
Hi,
I've been using dsniff on 4.6-Stable (and earlier) for a while. I've setup
a faster machine to run this in the lab. This machine however has an
built-in xl interface. Things don't work.
The 'old' machine on the same hub works just fine. Its using vx0.
My guess is that doing hw checksum
On Thu, 11 Jul 2002, Juan Francisco Rodriguez Hervella wrote:
> Hello:
>
> I'm very confused with the sysctl internals.
>
> For example, looking at the kernel source code of FreeBSD, I've realized
>
> of the following:
>
> netinet/in_proco.c:
> SYSCTL_NODE(_net_inet6, IPPROTO_DIVE
Hello,
I was looking for program that have lots of features about controlling my
clients ppp accounts. So far I've got this QUICK-R (for those of you who
don't know it, check: http://www.q-linux.com/software/quick-r/).
I was wondering if there is something like this but made for BSD, or at
least i
Hello:
I'm very confused with the sysctl internals.
For example, looking at the kernel source code of FreeBSD, I've realized
of the following:
netinet/in_proco.c:
SYSCTL_NODE(_net_inet6, IPPROTO_DIVERT, divert,
CTLFLAG_RW, 0, "DIVERT");
netinet/ip_divert.c:
SYSCTL_
Warning
Unable to process data:
multipart/mixed;boundary="=_NextPart_000_00A3_62D23A1C.D7817E20"
÷ Wed, 10.07.2002, × 13:18, Andreas Gerstenberg ÎÁÐÉÓÁÌ:
> Hi,
>
> I got the following error while figuring out the maximum amount of routes
> in the kernel routing table:
>
> # route add 192.168.1.1/32 10.0.0.1
> route: writing to routing socket: No buffer space available
> add net 192.168.1.1
Hi,
I hope someone can help me with this, I've been struggling with it for quite
some time now.
The set up:
bsdbox.foo.com -> internal GNAT firewall -> otherbox.foo.com
where bsdbox.foo.com has been anything from 4.0 to 4.5, and otherbox.foo.com
is anything from FreeBSD, Solaris 2.7, Solaris
Dear all,
I’ve encountered some strange behavior on my network.
I have two similar FreeBSD servers each with Squid and DNS server (djbdns). One of them is NAT/Firewall. They are in different
locations, thus they are connected trough Frame relay and are in different
subnets. One is “mast
38 matches
Mail list logo
