Re: INADDR_ANY bind in a multiip jail

2004-12-04 Thread Sten Spans
On Sat, 4 Dec 2004, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote: On Sat, 4 Dec 2004, Andre Oppermann wrote: i just found a patch from Pawel Jakub Dawidek(mijail5) which do not ... Do you have a link? I'd like to have a look at the code. http://garage.freebsd.pl/ This code is borken on 5.3, because of mfc's. There is a s

Re: INADDR_ANY bind in a multiip jail

2004-12-04 Thread Bjoern A. Zeeb
On Sat, 4 Dec 2004, Andre Oppermann wrote: > > i just found a patch from Pawel Jakub Dawidek(mijail5) which do not ... > Do you have a link? I'd like to have a look at the code. http://garage.freebsd.pl/ -- Bjoern A. Zeeb bzeeb at Zabbadoz dot NeT _

Re: INADDR_ANY bind in a multiip jail

2004-12-04 Thread Andre Oppermann
Meno Abels wrote: > > Hello, > > i just found a patch from Pawel Jakub Dawidek(mijail5) which do not > need the pcb bind > to multiple ip's. He solve the problem my marking the socket that is bound to > a > jail with inaddr_any. With this mark he is filtering the incoming > connection lookup to

Re: FreeBSD kernel pppd - mppe/mschapv1/2/radius support

2004-12-04 Thread Valentin Nechayev
Fri, Nov 26, 2004 at 13:24:31, anthonyv wrote about "FreeBSD kernel pppd - mppe/mschapv1/2/radius support": > After extensively googling FreeBSD pppd's support for mppe, mschapv1, > mschapv2 and radius, I've stumbled into a mess of patches for very random > versions of pppd and FreeBSD. > Does

Re: kern/73129: [patch] IPFW misbehaviour in RELENG_5

2004-12-04 Thread Gleb Smirnoff
On Sun, Dec 05, 2004 at 12:53:52AM +0300, Maxim Konovalov wrote: M> IMHO restoring the historic behaviour (even broken in some respects) M> is the best thing we can do at the moment. + my vote. Using 'ipfw fwd' on packets just being nated, is a very common and used technique. I know several place

Re: pf and bridging

2004-12-04 Thread Andre Oppermann
Max Laier wrote: > > On Thursday 02 December 2004 19:45, Petr Holub wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > I wonder if it is possible to use the new pf firewall together with > > bridging as it is possible to use it with ipf and ipfw. > > Unfortunately the PFIL_HOOKS in bridge.c don't work too well for pf (o

Re: New Networking Project...

2004-12-04 Thread Andre Oppermann
Michal Mertl wrote: > > I looked at the project page and noticed one thing I found code for. > > Task: Rework code in FreeBSD's ip_icmp.c such that ICMP responses for > forwarding can be throttled also. Call badport_bandlim() before icmp_error()? > > Andres Oppermann wrote simple patch for it an

Re: kern/73129: [patch] IPFW misbehaviour in RELENG_5

2004-12-04 Thread Maxim Konovalov
On Sat, 4 Dec 2004, 21:37+0100, Andre Oppermann wrote: [...] > > Investigating pre-PFIL_HOOKS ipfw I have not found any analog of > > this check. These checks do break some useful functionality: > > > > 1) policy routing of hosts from connected networks > > 2) policy routing of locally originated

Re: route cacheing for gif(4) should be optional

2004-12-04 Thread Andre Oppermann
Gleb Smirnoff wrote: > > On Sat, Dec 04, 2004 at 09:02:46PM +0100, Andre Oppermann wrote: > A> If we are talking about a multi-gigabit gif tunnel server then I'd agree > A> that we need some form of optimzation. But for everything it's simply > A> not going to make a difference. Doing a route lo

Re: route cacheing for gif(4) should be optional

2004-12-04 Thread Gleb Smirnoff
On Sat, Dec 04, 2004 at 09:02:46PM +0100, Andre Oppermann wrote: A> If we are talking about a multi-gigabit gif tunnel server then I'd agree A> that we need some form of optimzation. But for everything it's simply A> not going to make a difference. Doing a route lookup is fast enough for A> any n

Re: INADDR_ANY bind in a multiip jail

2004-12-04 Thread Meno Abels
Hello, i just found a patch from Pawel Jakub Dawidek(mijail5) which do not need the pcb bind to multiple ip's. He solve the problem my marking the socket that is bound to a jail with inaddr_any. With this mark he is filtering the incoming connection lookup to the pcb structure on jail bases. This

Re: INADDR_ANY bind in a multiip jail

2004-12-04 Thread Andre Oppermann
Meno Abels wrote: > > Hello, > > i had made a patch for 5_X (kern/69064) jail code which enables ipv6 and > multi ip numbers to a jail. > I currently solved the INADDR_ANY binding to map to the first ip of > the jail. But this is not really the good solution it would be better to bind > to all ip

Re: kern/73129: [patch] IPFW misbehaviour in RELENG_5

2004-12-04 Thread Andre Oppermann
Gleb Smirnoff wrote: > > Andre, > > what is reason for these two checks in ip_output(): > > if (!in_localip(ip->ip_src) && !in_localaddr(ip->ip_dst)) { > dst = (struct sockaddr_in *)&ro->ro_dst; > bcopy((fwd_tag+1), dst, sizeof(

INADDR_ANY bind in a multiip jail

2004-12-04 Thread Meno Abels
Hello, i had made a patch for 5_X (kern/69064) jail code which enables ipv6 and multi ip numbers to a jail. I currently solved the INADDR_ANY binding to map to the first ip of the jail. But this is not really the good solution it would be better to bind to all ip's of the jail. Which are simple

Re: route cacheing for gif(4) should be optional

2004-12-04 Thread Andre Oppermann
Valentin Nechayev wrote: > > Hi, > > Mon, Nov 29, 2004 at 19:15:29, glebius wrote about "Re: route cacheing for > gif(4) should be optional": > > A>> However there have been reasons for > A>> storing the rtentry pointer in struct gif. In the old days ip_output() > A>> required an rtentry poin

Re: route cacheing for gif(4) should be optional

2004-12-04 Thread Valentin Nechayev
Hi, Mon, Nov 29, 2004 at 19:15:29, glebius wrote about "Re: route cacheing for gif(4) should be optional": A>> However there have been reasons for A>> storing the rtentry pointer in struct gif. In the old days ip_output() A>> required an rtentry pointer to be passed on, this is no longer the

Re: Initial review request for IPv6 Fast Forwarding and IP6STEALTH

2004-12-04 Thread James
On Sat, Dec 04, 2004 at 05:52:30PM +0100, Andre Oppermann wrote: > Nice, needs some cleanup though. Once you have cleaned it up you can run > it either through me or [EMAIL PROTECTED] He is more of a IPv6 fan than I am > (in my > book IPv6 is broken by design^TM). Indeed, my first code I submit

Re: Initial review request for IPv6 Fast Forwarding and IP6STEALTH

2004-12-04 Thread Andre Oppermann
James wrote: > > Folks, > > Attached is initial code for ip6_fastforward() that I'm proposing for FreeBSD > 5.x. This code was written for an internally modified FreeBSD 4.9, however in > the next few weeks, I will be porting this into FreeBSD 5.3 tree and submit a > final draft for review back t

Re: ALTQ integration and FreeBSD 4.x

2004-12-04 Thread Jeremie Le Hen
> After more than a day's mail-archive reading and FreeBSD 4.10 source > code browsing, I don't think ALTQ has been integrated into 4.x branch > (I know it is for the 5.x branch). Is that correct? I was wondering if > some folks would know the status of ALTQ on FreeBSD 4.x; alternatively > I'd appr

Re: ipfw and bridging [was: pf and bridging]

2004-12-04 Thread Chuck Swiger
Ian Smith wrote: [ ... ] Read those ones for interest, but it leaves me wondering: can you use stateful filtering in ipfw, then? (here ipfw1 on a 4.8-RELEASE box with BRIDGE in kernel so far, but I imagine this would apply also to ipfw2?) Yes, you ought to be able to perform stateful packet filte

Re: about a usb adsl modem driver

2004-12-04 Thread Jose M Rodriguez
El Sábado, 4 de Diciembre de 2004 01:56, Bruce M Simpson escribió: > On Fri, Dec 03, 2004 at 09:25:56PM +0100, Jose M Rodriguez wrote: > > But noted strong differences between atm boards and adsl modems. > > > > - atm boards are hardware assisted. usb adsl modems are bare > > assisted. - atm board