On Fri, 1 Aug 2003, Don Bowman wrote:
> > u_short ui_ref; /* reference count */
> > };
> >
>
> We are pushing in the ~50-~70K TCP connections to this process.
>
> I think i see what you are suggesting :)
>
> --don
Bingo. Change that u_short to a u_int, and see if that ca
> From: Mike Silbersack [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Fri, 1 Aug 2003, Scot Loach wrote:
>
> > Earlier this week one of our FreeBSD 4.7 boxes panic'd.
> I've posted the
> > stack trace at the end of this message. Using google, I've
> found several
> > references to this panic over the past th
On Fri, 1 Aug 2003, michael rabinovich wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Does anyone know the status of T/TCP support on FreeBSD 4.7?
It's clearly very rarely used, and may indeed be broken.
I don't believe that the T/TCP breakage was intentional, but I'm not
familiar enough with T/TCP to determine what the pro
On Fri, 1 Aug 2003, Scot Loach wrote:
> Earlier this week one of our FreeBSD 4.7 boxes panic'd. I've posted the
> stack trace at the end of this message. Using google, I've found several
> references to this panic over the past three years, but it seems its never
> been taken to root cause.
>
>
On Fri, 1 Aug 2003, Michael W. Oliver wrote:
> +--- On Friday, August 01, 2003 15:30,
> | Oldach, Helge proclaimed:
> |
> | > I am no programmer, so forgive my ignorance in that respect, but why
> | > can't a
> | > metric be used to differentiate routes to the same destination network
> | > within
On Fri, Aug 01, 2003 at 02:22:48PM +0200, Thomas Zauner wrote:
> hi,
>
> i set up a NIS server on freebsd(5.1) excactly like in the handbook and
> then started the NIS client on linux (RH-9).
>
>
> (i just have 1 test user for now)
>
>
> 1)
>
> here's the output from ypcat passwd:
> the clie
On Fri, 1 Aug 2003, Steve Francis wrote:
> From LINT (see below), the comment says the VM_KMEM_SIZE_MAX is 200M,
> yet the option says 100M. Comment typo, or typo in the option?
> Is increasing the VM_KMEM_SIZE_MAX (which should take us to up to 256M
> given 1G RAM) sufficient to allow extra s
+--- On Friday, August 01, 2003 15:30,
| Oldach, Helge proclaimed:
|
| > I am no programmer, so forgive my ignorance in that respect, but why
| > can't a
| > metric be used to differentiate routes to the same destination network
| > within the routing table? I happened to be googling and found:
|
THanks for the reply... Question below.
Mike Silbersack wrote:
Mbufs & mbuf clusters are allocated from the kernel map, so it's possible
for allocations to fail due to the kernel map being relatively full due to
other parts of the kernel eating memory. This is probably what's
happening in your cas
On Fri, 1 Aug 2003, Steve Francis wrote:
> I have a FreeBSD 4.8-RELEASE #5 system that reported:
> Aug 1 11:50:39 rack2-101 /kernel: All mbuf clusters exhausted, please see tuning(7).
> Aug 1 11:50:39 rack2-101 /kernel: All mbufs exhausted, please see tuning(7).
>
> Yet its not close to the max
Bruce, Michael:
Thanks a lot for the sysctl values tips.
While 4.7 release does not seem to have drop_synfin
option, syncookies indeed used to be 1 (but now we changed
it to 0) on both machines:
> sysctl net.inet.tcp | grep -E 'rfc1644|drop_synfin|cook'
net.inet.tcp.rfc1644: 1
net.inet.tcp.synco
I have a FreeBSD 4.8-RELEASE #5 system that reported:
Aug 1 11:50:39 rack2-101 /kernel: All mbuf clusters exhausted, please see tuning(7).
Aug 1 11:50:39 rack2-101 /kernel: All mbufs exhausted, please see tuning(7).
Yet its not close to the max allowed for clusters.
rack2-101.nyc# netstat -m
1338
> I am no programmer, so forgive my ignorance in that respect, but why can't
a
> metric be used to differentiate routes to the same destination network
> within the routing table? I happened to be googling and found:
>
> http://daily.daemonnews.org/view_story.php3?story_id=3878
>
> which descr
Better yet would be equal cost multi-path, since the code to solve that
should (mostly) be able to handle the general case :)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] :)
Content-Description: signed data
> [this was posted under another thread, so I am reposting as a new thread to
> hopefully generate some responses.
Bruce M Simpson wrote:
SYN cookies and T/TCP can't co-exist.
Right, right, I forgot that one. Thanks.
sysctl -a net.inet.tcp ;-) It's less than a screenful.
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To
Michael Sierchio wrote:
> michael rabinovich wrote:
> >
> > Am I missing something (after all, FreeBSD is supposed to be a ref
> > implementation of T/TCP!) and if not is there is a simple way around
> > this problem, short of going back to earlier FreeBSD releases?
>
> sysctl net.inet.tcp | grep
On Fri, Aug 01, 2003 at 11:14:12AM -0400, michael rabinovich wrote:
> Does anyone know the status of T/TCP support on FreeBSD 4.7?
...
> Am I missing something (after all, FreeBSD is supposed to be a ref
> implementation of T/TCP!) and if not is there is a simple way around
> this problem, short
michael rabinovich wrote:
Am I missing something (after all, FreeBSD is supposed to be a ref
implementation of T/TCP!) and if not is there is a simple way around
this problem, short of going back to earlier FreeBSD releases?
sysctl net.inet.tcp | grep -E 'rfc1644|drop_synfin'
?
__
Hi,
Does anyone know the status of T/TCP support on FreeBSD 4.7?
A simple test using the ttcpcli and ttcpserv
examples from Stevens' T/TCP book shows basically the
same behavior as described in Sec. 3.7 of the book as "Solaris bug":
the server drops the data in the initial SYN
segment from the
Earlier this week one of our FreeBSD 4.7 boxes panic'd. I've posted the
stack trace at the end of this message. Using google, I've found several
references to this panic over the past three years, but it seems its never
been taken to root cause.
The box crashes because the cr_uidinfo pointer in
hi,
i set up a NIS server on freebsd(5.1) excactly like in the handbook and
then started the NIS client on linux (RH-9).
(i just have 1 test user for now)
1)
here's the output from ypcat passwd:
the client binds the server ok:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ypcat passwd
testo:*:1003:1003:User &:/home/te
> From: Bryce Edwards [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Donnerstag, 31. Juli 2003 18:59
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: freevrrp
>
> I'm trying to run freevrrpd on a server with two interfaces
> for redundancy.
I would prefer a layer 2 based approach ("EtherChannel") instead because of
the mu
22 matches
Mail list logo
