> > If I was to pursue this, would someone on this list consider committing the
> > work to current?
> ...
> > + case DLT_NULL:
> > + sockp->sa_family = AF_UNSPEC;
> > + if(strcmp(ifp->if_name, "tun") == 0)
> > + hlen = sizeof(int);
> > + else
> > +
Nickolay Kritsky wrote this message on Mon, Jun 06, 2005 at 21:38 +0400:
> There was an old funny thing about bridging vlans: if you bridge vlanXX
> interfaces without bridging parents - do not forget to put parent in up
> and promiscuous mode. For 4.6 kernel it also required some patching.
> What
There was an old funny thing about bridging vlans: if you bridge vlanXX
interfaces without bridging parents - do not forget to put parent in up
and promiscuous mode. For 4.6 kernel it also required some patching.
What version are you running?
Nick
-Original Message-
From: John-Mark Gurney
Synopsis: [ PATCH ] ICMP_UNREACH_NEEDFRAG with unspecified icmp_nextmtu are
ignored
Responsible-Changed-From-To: freebsd-net->andre
Responsible-Changed-By: andre
Responsible-Changed-When: Mon Jun 6 17:32:39 GMT 2005
Responsible-Changed-Why:
Take over. Patch just needs MFC.
http://www.freebsd.or
The following reply was made to PR kern/81813; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: Maxim Konovalov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Dan Lukes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: kern/81813: [ PATCH ] ICMP_UNREACH_NEEDFRAG with unspecified
icmp_nextmtu are ignored
Date:
Synopsis: [ PATCH ] ICMP_UNREACH_NEEDFRAG with unspecified icmp_nextmtu are
ignored
Responsible-Changed-From-To: freebsd-bugs->freebsd-net
Responsible-Changed-By: arved
Responsible-Changed-When: Mon Jun 6 16:03:57 GMT 2005
Responsible-Changed-Why:
Over to freebsd-net Mailinglist for evaluation
On 6/6/05, shiner chen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Inorder to impliment the dynamic load freeback policy ,I wrote a kld on
> the front-end of cluster server for collecting the load of back nodes.
> I don't want the acceptive thread to detect the data arrived socket
> continuously,because ,which w
On Mon, Jun 06, 2005 at 08:16:38PM +1200, Matthew Luckie wrote:
> If I was to pursue this, would someone on this list consider committing the
> work to current?
...
> + case DLT_NULL:
> + sockp->sa_family = AF_UNSPEC;
> + if(strcmp(ifp->if_name, "tun") == 0)
> +
Current FreeBSD problem reports
Critical problems
Serious problems
S Submitted Tracker Resp. Description
---
o [2005/05/19] ia64/81284 net Unaligned Reference with pf on 5.4/IA64
1 problem total.
No
> I can successfully write BPF packets up to 1500 bytes in size (1496 IP
> bytes without the address family integer). Writes larger than this
> return EMSGSIZE.
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-net/2005-May/007371.html
Just for the record, the patch below fixes this on 4.11; the same
10 matches
Mail list logo