Hi,
Would like to know how to test VLAN for ethernet
network driver for a NIC.
Thanks a lot
shubha
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Autos - Get free new car price quotes
http://autos.yahoo.com
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscri
TCP traffic as such does not get any priority over UDP traffic, but the way
in which the TCP messages are sent (Data Streaming) is different from the
way UDP messages are sent (Datagram).
In essense, UDP messages wait till there's enough space for the entire
message before the message is added t
I'm using FreeBSD 4.5 and have custom applications that send receive
network packets over both tcp and udp sockets. For the sake of an
example, assume that the udp traffic is always constant, but the tcp
traffic density changes. During times of heavy tcp traffic density, will
udp messages which
> On Thu, 18 Jul 2002 19:18:33 +0200,
> Erik Trulsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>> Excellent, that's just what I was looking for! Thanks.
>> >do a man getifaddrs(3)
> Just be aware that getifaddrs(3) (which does seem to be a quite useful
> function) is not very portable.
> It appears t
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED]> you
write:
>
>When I attempt to make a sock_stream connection to an IP, and DON'T
>receive an ACK or RST response, it seems that the system retries a finite
>number of times by sending additional SYN packets. There also looks to be
>a 3 or 6 second delay between SYN
On Thu, Jul 18, 2002 at 02:39:26PM -0700, Julian Elischer wrote:
> and now that we are on -net...
> TADA!!!
> SACK is now supported by default on 90% of internet hosts except for
> "guess who?"
supported does not mean used though, and I am not even sure how much
traffic is successfully delive
When I attempt to make a sock_stream connection to an IP, and DON'T
receive an ACK or RST response, it seems that the system retries a finite
number of times by sending additional SYN packets. There also looks to be
a 3 or 6 second delay between SYN retries. After four or five, the
connection f
and now that we are on -net...
TADA!!!
SACK is now supported by default on 90% of internet hosts except for
"guess who?"
SACK is the way that most internet traffic is now handling packet loss.
Isn't it about time that one of the (3?) SACK implementations got
integrated?
On Thu, 18 Jul 2002,
[Trying desparately to move this discussion to the correct list]
I spent a few minutes talking to Dave Clark about this question this
afternoon. Here's my paraphrase of his opinion:
- He disclaims completely up-to-date knowledge of the current research
results.
- He feels that 1000 ms is c
* De: Alex Rousskov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [ Data: 2002-07-18 ]
[ Subjecte: Re: programatically list all local IP addresses ? ]
> On Thu, 18 Jul 2002, Chuck T. wrote:
>
> > Yes portablity is a concern, unfortunately my program will
> > probably be used on Linux more than FreeBSD, sigh. I st
On Thu, 18 Jul 2002, Chuck T. wrote:
> Yes portablity is a concern, unfortunately my program will
> probably be used on Linux more than FreeBSD, sigh. I starting to
> read about ioctl() and SIOCGIFADDR which appears to be portable
> (and a pain).
We had to write portable local address detection
Yes portablity is a concern, unfortunately my program will probably
be used on Linux more than FreeBSD, sigh. I starting to read about
ioctl() and SIOCGIFADDR which appears to be portable (and a pain).
It looks like the Linux crowd is adding getifaddrs(3) as part of their
ipv6 effort, but I'd ra
I'm working on just such a driver. It has layers that communicate with
assumptions about structure alignment. Moving struct arpcom to the
beginning breaks this, and requires scattered changes throughout. :-(
Even so I'd rather do it the right way. Unless, I hear someone else
disagreeing, I'l
Erik Trulsson wrote:
>
> Just be aware that getifaddrs(3) (which does seem to be a quite useful
> function) is not very portable.
> It appears to be available on recent releases of all the *BSDs, but it
> does not seem to exist on Solaris or Linux.
>
What would be the portable alternative to get
On Thu, Jul 18, 2002 at 09:52:14AM -0700, Chuck T. wrote:
> Excellent, that's just what I was looking for! Thanks.
> >do a man getifaddrs(3)
> >
> >Bruce
Just be aware that getifaddrs(3) (which does seem to be a quite useful
function) is not very portable.
It appears to be available on recent re
Excellent, that's just what I was looking for! Thanks.
>do a man getifaddrs(3)
>
>Bruce
_
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe fr
>Use gethostname()/gethostbyname() (or gethostbyaddr()) and then look
>through the 'h_addr_list' array in the 'struct hostent' returned by
>gethostbyname(). That should contain all the network addresses that
>were found for the given host.
That doesn't work when the lookup matches an entry in /et
Erik Trulsson wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 18, 2002 at 07:27:08AM -0700, Chuck T. wrote:
>
>>I'm sure this is a FAQ, but I sure can't find the answer. I've tried the
>>usually suggested gethostname()/gethostbyname() approach, but that only
>>returns the *first* match in /etc/hosts. In one case that was
Thierry/all,
I do now notice that if I don't put a bpf filter inplace to cut out some of
the traffic there are a lot of dropped packets.
My question then is: Does FreeBSD multi-thread the NIC drivers? Right now,
using the dc driver.
From: Thierry Herbelot [[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday,
On Thu, Jul 18, 2002 at 07:27:08AM -0700, Chuck T. wrote:
> I'm sure this is a FAQ, but I sure can't find the answer. I've tried the
> usually suggested gethostname()/gethostbyname() approach, but that only
> returns the *first* match in /etc/hosts. In one case that was 127.0.0.1.
> Clearly this
I'm sure this is a FAQ, but I sure can't find the answer. I've tried the
usually suggested gethostname()/gethostbyname() approach, but that only
returns the *first* match in /etc/hosts. In one case that was 127.0.0.1.
Clearly this was a case where /etc/host.conf gave priority to the host file.
On 2002-07-18 03:37:46 -0700, Sulaiman Khan wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> where can I download the complete API for BSD Sockets. I am currently working to
>make an application compatiable with Berkeley sockets. So can you please guide me how
>I can obtain the complete API
>
> Thanks
>
> Sulaiman Kha
- Original Message -
From: "nascar24" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2002 12:00 PM
Subject: FXP behind firewall
> Hello,
>
> I have enabled AllowForeighAddress is proftpd.conf but still, people can't
> fxp to my ftp site.
>
> I think it has somethin
Hello,
I have enabled AllowForeighAddress is proftpd.conf but still, people can't
fxp to my ftp site.
I think it has something to do with my IPFW rules. Here are the rules.
# allow loopback traffic
add 100 allow ip from any to any via lo0
# protect loopback address
add 200 deny ip from 127.0.0
24 matches
Mail list logo
