Vlad Galu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
|Adrian Penisoara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
|
||Hi again,
||
|| Thanks for all your answers.
||
|| A small comment though.
||
||Vlad Galu wrote:
||
||> Try fxp. It has better polling support, and there's the
||>advantage of
||>the link0 flag. When it's
Adrian Penisoara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
|Hi again,
|
| Thanks for all your answers.
|
| A small comment though.
|
|Vlad Galu wrote:
|
|> Try fxp. It has better polling support, and there's the
|>advantage of
|>the link0 flag. When it's set, the interface won't send interrupts to
|
| Th
Hi again,
Thanks for all your answers.
A small comment though.
Vlad Galu wrote:
> Try fxp. It has better polling support, and there's the
>advantage of
>the link0 flag. When it's set, the interface won't send interrupts to
The man page sais that only some versions of the chipset sup
Hello all.
I want to secure the network traffic of the users on my LAN, I want to
secure the MSN and ICQ data so people on the building can't use a sniffer
and watch the conversations.
I have something like this:
InternetInternet
^
Robert Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
|
|On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
|
|> How does one create a dummy network interface in FreeBSD?
|
|Dummy in what sense? An interface where the packets are simply
|dropped? if_tap and if_tun both provide pseudo-device in /dev that a
|usersp
On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> How does one create a dummy network interface in FreeBSD?
Dummy in what sense? An interface where the packets are simply dropped?
if_tap and if_tun both provide pseudo-device in /dev that a userspace
process can attach to in order to emulate a ne
How does one create a dummy network interface in FreeBSD?
Thanks,
Jack
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Vlad Galu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
|Adrian Penisoara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
|
||Hi,
||
|| At one site that I administer we have a gateway server which
|services|a large SOHO LAN (more than 300 stations) and I'm facing a
|serious|issue: very often we see strong spoofed floods (variable sou
I administer some home networks with 200..500 users on port
and 5..12 ports on each router.
The trouble is that router can't do somethig useful when
link saturated. The only effective way found is
2..3 mb/s restriction _from_ every user on each switch port
PS
typical router has Tyan 2466N-4M mobo
On Wed, 14 Jan 2004, John wrote:
> I've been talking with Luca Deri about a paper he wrote (
> http://luca.ntop.org/Ring.pdf). In it he says he plans to port
> this to FreeBSD. I was just wondering if anyone has looked this
> his work. I'd help him but seeing as this is way over my perl skills
I've been talking with Luca Deri about a paper he wrote (
http://luca.ntop.org/Ring.pdf). In it he says he plans to port
this to FreeBSD. I was just wondering if anyone has looked this
his work. I'd help him but seeing as this is way over my perl skills
head i though i would post over here about i
Hi all thanks for all your answers.
The solution that i found was to add to my ipnat.rules this lines:
map dc1 192.168.10.0/24 -> 0/32 portmap tcp/udp auto
map dc1 192.168.10.0/24 -> 0/32
and to my rc.conf this :
static_routes="linux"
route_linux="192.168.0.0/16 192.168.1.3"
regards.
Hi a
In reply to David Gilbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> :
> In our experience, switch to fxp ethernet cards, test several
> motherboards and enable polling.
>
> fxp and em cards appear to have the best performance ... outrunning
> other cards by a fair margin.
Hmmmwe've been using SysKonnect (older o
> On Wed, 14 Jan 2004, Richard Wendland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wri
tes:
> > device polling(8) really does help _alot_ for packet floods/storms.
> > for device polling to work properly (imho) you would need to set HZ
> > to 1000.
> > I dont recommend any higher HZ on a PIII.
>
> Incidentally, s
Hi,
The second beta package is coming out soon and will contain some small
fixes (if_fxp.c compile fix, dc(4) not-working fix).
Does anyone have any more issues or suggested patches for -beta1 ?
Thank you.
--
Adrian Penisoara
Ady (@freebsd.ady.ro)
FreeBSD/ALTQ project
http://www.rofug.ro/
> "Adrian" == Adrian Penisoara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Adrian> Hi, At one site that I administer we have a gateway server
Adrian> which services a large SOHO LAN (more than 300 stations) and
Adrian> I'm facing a serious issue: very often we see strong spoofed
Adrian> floods (variable sourc
Nicolás de Bari Embríz G. R. wrote:
Hi all, I need some help routing or making Nat on a LAN.
I have something like this:
I N T E R N E T
-
^ ^
| |
fxp0 public IP public I
just a note that i posted this to the ipfw list -- please
look at the ipfw list for the actual patch
cheers
luigi
- Forwarded message from Luigi Rizzo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 13:01:22 -0800
From: Luigi Rizzo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Request for re
Yes, this is the case. I tested it again, and the arp packet in question
doesn't get to the other machines. The sending machine does send
gratituous arp, however the em NIC is down for 3 or 4 seconds, and the
packet isn't sent on the wire.
I find it odd that the em driver would need to reinitia
The configuration file is not take into account by the server so with is a copy of the
end it in this mail. If someone wants the entire file he could give his email and I
will send it him the entire file.
Another time sorry about all this mail.
best reagards.
Jan 1
Adrian Penisoara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
|Hi,
|
| At one site that I administer we have a gateway server which services
|a large SOHO LAN (more than 300 stations) and I'm facing a serious
|issue: very often we see strong spoofed floods (variable source IP and
|port, variable destination IP, d
It seems that the join file is deleted from the mail so I tried to send it using tar.
Sorry for the previous mail.
I send some mail before about some problems I have concerning the configuration of
pppOe and some people ask me about the ppp.log. It is in this mail as a join file. I
try actually
I send some mail before about some problems I have concerning the configuration of
pppOe and some people ask me about the ppp.log. It is in this mail as a join file. I
try actually to connect using the command ppp -ddial tele2 and when I try to connect
to internet using netscape I have an error
David,
the problem with if_gre is actually twofold:
- the change of htons(m->m_pkthdr.len) in the last commit to that
file is incorrect. In FreeBSD this is done in ip_output for all
packets sent (unless RAW).
- The struct ip which is contained in struct gh is not correctly
intialized.
On Wednesday 14 January 2004 10:29, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
> hi,
> in implementing ipv6 support for ipfw2, i hit the following
> problem: /etc/protocols has an entry:
>
> ipv641 IPV6# ipv6
>
> which is somewhat confusing for the parser -- if you
> type something like
>
>
> device polling(8) really does help _alot_ for packet floods/storms.
> for device polling to work properly (imho) you would need to set HZ to 1000.
> I dont recommend any higher HZ on a PIII.
Incidentally, setting HZ > 1000 would cause FreeBSD TCP to not comply
with RFC1323, as it would make the
>
> What can I do to make the system better handle this kind of
> traffic ?
> Could device polling(8) or just increasing the kernel
> frequency clock to 1000Hz or more improve the situation ?
> What kind of network cards could face a lot better this
> burden ? Are there any other solutions
Hi,
At one site that I administer we have a gateway server which services
a large SOHO LAN (more than 300 stations) and I'm facing a serious
issue: very often we see strong spoofed floods (variable source IP and
port, variable destination IP, destination port 80) which can go as far
as 100 000 p
On Wed, Jan 14, 2004 at 01:29:13AM -0800, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
> hi,
> in implementing ipv6 support for ipfw2, i hit the following
> problem: /etc/protocols has an entry:
>
> ipv641 IPV6# ipv6
>
> which is somewhat confusing for the parser -- if you
> type something like
hi,
in implementing ipv6 support for ipfw2, i hit the following
problem: /etc/protocols has an entry:
ipv641 IPV6# ipv6
which is somewhat confusing for the parser -- if you
type something like
ipfw add allow ipv6 from foo to bar
the "ipv6" will match in the
Hi all, I need some help routing or making Nat on a LAN.
I have something like this:
I N T E R N E T
-
^ ^
| |
fxp0 public IP public IP
|
31 matches
Mail list logo
