Hello,
This is an automated reply from Sun Microsystems. It
was generated when a message was sent to one of our
email aliases with this address as the 'Reply to:'.
Thank you for your interest in Sun products and
technologies and for taking the time to write. If
you are seeking technical support
> ok ok ok, here is it
Too many arguments specified - maximum is 2.
Summary of resource utilization
---
CPU time:0.000 sec
Overhead CPU:0.000 sec
CPU model: 4-CPU Ultra-80
Job origin: freebsd-net@FREEBSD.ORG
_
The distribution of your message dated Sun, 08 May 2005 06:34:56 GMT with no
subject has been postponed because the JAVA-AWT list is held. No action is
required from you; your message will be reprocessed automatically once the
list owner releases the list.
__
The distribution of your message dated Sun, 08 May 2005 06:34:56 GMT with no
subject has been postponed because the JNI list is held. No action is
required from you; your message will be reprocessed automatically once the
list owner releases the list.
__
Hello,
This is an automated reply from Sun Microsystems. It
was generated when a message was sent to one of our
email aliases with this address as the 'Reply to:'.
Thank you for your interest in Sun products and
technologies and for taking the time to write. If
you are seeking technical support
On 5/7/05, Jethro Wright III <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> My problem is (per the diagram) rl0.
> dc0 and xl0 are anonymous interfaces (no IP addresses.) rl0 has a local,
> private IP adress. dc0 and rl0 are plugged into the same switch and therein
> lies the specific problem.
man bridge(4):
BUG
Folks:
Have a problem with basic bridging and ARP. Below is a simple diagram
of
the PC in question:
++
||
(internal) dc0-+ FreeBSD 4.9-RELEASE +-xl0 (external 'Net)
At 17.45 07/05/2005, Mike Jakubik wrote:
>On Sat, May 7, 2005 11:20 am, Joao Barros said:
>> Hi all,
>>
>>
>> I recently tried ntop on FreeBSD 5.4 RC3 and RC4 and was disappointed
>> with the problems I bumped into. I reported this to ntop's developers
>> mailing list and a few coments about FreeBS
On Sat, May 7, 2005 11:20 am, Joao Barros said:
> Hi all,
>
>
> I recently tried ntop on FreeBSD 5.4 RC3 and RC4 and was disappointed
> with the problems I bumped into. I reported this to ntop's developers
> mailing list and a few coments about FreeBSD threading came up. It would
> be interesting i
On Sat, May 7, 2005 5:35 am, Marian Durkovic said:
>>> To achieve wirespeed performance, the TX FIFO must be large enough to
>>> accomodate 2 jumbo packets (not just 1 as the driver was assuming).
>>> There was also a typo in the driver, causing the PBA tuning on most
>>> cards to be non-functiona
Hi all,
I recently tried ntop on FreeBSD 5.4 RC3 and RC4 and was disappointed
with the problems I bumped into. I reported this to ntop's developers
mailing list and a few coments about FreeBSD threading came up.
It would be interesting if someone could take a look at the thread I
started: http://l
Greetings and Salutations:
On 5/6/05 6:56 PM, "Mike Silbersack" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'll take a look at it while I'm at BSDCan next week. From your website's
> description of the attack, I don't see why FreeBSD would be affected so
> greatly... we must be wasting a lot of time traversing
On Wed, 4 May 2005, Josef Karthauser wrote:
On Wed, May 04, 2005 at 06:13:22PM +0100, Gavin Atkinson wrote:
I believe I am seeing similar problems to you, though uptime for me is
generally measurable in days rather than minutes. I've found that
adding an explicit "allow all from any to any" and th
> > To achieve wirespeed performance, the TX FIFO must be large enough to
> > accomodate 2 jumbo packets (not just 1 as the driver was assuming).
> > There was also a typo in the driver, causing the PBA tuning on most
> > cards to be non-functional.
> >
> > Please be sure to use em driver vers
14 matches
Mail list logo
