Hi,
netstat only shows the traffic per interface, I need traffic
information per socket. Is there a tool to do this?
Best regards,
Guohan
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, sen
I've been following this little thread and was curious about how
my own solution compares w/ the others discussed.
x.y.z.14
${ipfw} add pipe 7 ip from x.y.z.14 to any
${ipfw} pipe 7 config bw 1024Kbit/s queue 50
${ipfw} add pipe 8 ip from any to x.y.z.14
${ipfw} pipe 8 config bw 1024Kbit
On Tue, Jan 18, 2005 at 02:27:47PM -0800, Julian Elischer wrote:
>
> Looks good but I'm not convinced that it needs a whole new keyword of
> we tap in through the divert mechanism.
FWIW, keywords are very cheap and generally quite clean in ipfw2. I'd
be more concerned in ipfw1.
-- Brooks
pgpT
Brooks Davis wrote:
On Mon, Jan 17, 2005 at 11:06:10PM +0300, Gleb Smirnoff wrote:
Dear collegues,
here is quite a simple node for direct interaction between ipfw(4)
and netgraph(4). It is going to be more effective and error-prone
than a complicated construction around divert socket and ng_ks
On Mon, Jan 17, 2005 at 11:06:10PM +0300, Gleb Smirnoff wrote:
> Dear collegues,
>
> here is quite a simple node for direct interaction between ipfw(4)
> and netgraph(4). It is going to be more effective and error-prone
> than a complicated construction around divert socket and ng_ksocket[1].
Howdy folks,
I have a small pile of OpenVPN tunnels terminating on a "tunnel router"
(FreeBSD -current on sparc64 with 5 hme ethernet interfaces). Tunnels
carry general IP and OSPF traffic. They may carry IPv6 in the future,
though that's not a necessity. The number of tunnels will grow over time
I'd like to apologize to everyone for dropping the ball on this. I came
down with a cold on Monday evening, and was pretty out of it until
Thursday. By the time I had caught back up on everything I needed to, we
had already missed the window for 4.11. I'll get back into this in a few
days.
On Sun, 16 Jan 2005, 02:47+0100, Julien Lesaint wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This is a followup to the original post from James Jun, on Dec, 2003.
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/htdig/freebsd-net/2003-December/002114.html
>
> Quick reminder: in the case the route to the packet's source is not the
> interf
> "Max" == Max Laier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Hi Max,
Max> Just guessing, but I assume you forgot to use round brackets
Max> around your NAT and from/to addresses. It should look like the
Max> following:
Don't think so but maybe, I'm wrong :
# macros
int_if = "xl0"
ext_if = "ppp0"
tun
