> > --- print-tcp.c-ORG Thu Apr 21 15:36:05 2005
> > +++ print-tcp.c Wed Sep 21 18:43:51 2005
> > @@ -799,7 +799,7 @@
> > MD5_Update(&ctx, tcpmd5secret, strlen(tcpmd5secret));
> > MD5_Final(sig, &ctx);
> >
> > - if (memcmp(rcvsig, sig, 16))
> > + if (memcmp(rcvsig, sig, TCP_SIGL
Greetings,
We would all be very interested to see the complete report. Particularly if
you fix up the results for FreeBSD :)
Chucks right, we need waaay more info. We don't even know what version of
FreeBSD your running.
There are lots of sysctl variables to adjust. Here's a bunch I play
Greetings,
There seems to be heaps of people on the list reporting errors with em cards
and FreeBSD 5.4 -stable-ish (as in cvsup-ed within the last couple of
months). Are there many people running these ok? Perhaps is not the
network card so much as some other element of the computer?
Rega
Pawel Worach wrote:
(kgdb) print *tw
$1 = {tw_inpcb = 0x0, snd_nxt = 438603527, rcv_nxt = 3383864561,
iss = 438603320, irs = 3383863898, cc_recv = 0, cc_send = 0,
last_win = 65534, tw_so_options = 4, tw_cred = 0x0, t_recent = 0,
t_starttime = 4294952294, tw_time = 0, tw_2msl = {le_next = 0
Greeting Sten,
I'm a little worried about a couple of the things you've said:
1. "It is more common to block icmp messages about reassembly problems than
DF problems IF a message is generated in the first place."
I think that's crap. Most firewalls DO correctly and statefully accept the
Exists the possibility to make NAT POOL with IPFW + NATD ?
-- daniel
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
On Wed, Sep 21, 2005 at 07:23:43PM +0200, Peter van Dijk wrote:
> Hello,
>
> with 6.0-BETA4 (from september 10th) if_tap and if_bridge cooperate
> perfectly.
>
> After upgrading to BETA5 my machine panics seconds after I ifconfig
> bridge0 up.. I tested if_tap independently and it is fine; if_bri
Noritoshi Demizu wrote:
> --- print-tcp.c-ORG Thu Apr 21 15:36:05 2005
> +++ print-tcp.c Wed Sep 21 18:43:51 2005
> @@ -799,7 +799,7 @@
> MD5_Update(&ctx, tcpmd5secret, strlen(tcpmd5secret));
> MD5_Final(sig, &ctx);
>
> - if (memcmp(rcvsig, sig, 16))
> + if (memcmp(rcvsig, sig
Hello,
with 6.0-BETA4 (from september 10th) if_tap and if_bridge cooperate
perfectly.
After upgrading to BETA5 my machine panics seconds after I ifconfig
bridge0 up.. I tested if_tap independently and it is fine; if_bridge
panics without if_tap too.
The error message is along the lines of 'unali
Robert Watson wrote:
>
> On Wed, 21 Sep 2005, Sten Daniel Sørsdal wrote:
>
> While the below is perfectly valid and useful and should be easy to
> implement with andre's proposed change, would you prefer an interface
> that allowed you to query the TCP connection and ask it what pathwise
> MTU it
Matthew Jakeman wrote:
Some colleagues and myself have performed some simple tests on various OS's
using iperf to simply fire packets from one pc to another over ethernet to
test a few characteristics such as packet loss, jitter etc between IPv4 and
IPv6. The configuration for all three OS's we
On Sun, Sep 18, 2005 at 14:15 -0400, Benjamin Rosenblum wrote:
...
> now the EM problem.
>
> when i am running a very high network load (streaming video, dumping
> ALOT of data across the network, etc) the network card disconnects (i
> loose pings and all my transfers drop) and 15-20 seconds lat
Robert Watson wrote:
>
> On Wed, 21 Sep 2005, Sten Daniel Sørsdal wrote:
>
> > Your assumption is that you can rely on routers in your path to inform
> > you that you that your packet size is causing fragments.
> >
> > Consider a client connected to an isp's network(1). The isp drops all
> > ICMP
Hi,
Some colleagues and myself have performed some simple tests on various OS's
using iperf to simply fire packets from one pc to another over ethernet to
test a few characteristics such as packet loss, jitter etc between IPv4 and
IPv6. The configuration for all three OS's were 'out of the box'
On Wed, 21 Sep 2005, Sten Daniel Sørsdal wrote:
Your assumption is that you can rely on routers in your path to inform
you that you that your packet size is causing fragments.
Consider a client connected to an isp's network(1). The isp drops all
ICMP packets. That network is then connected t
Robert Watson wrote:
>
> On Wed, 21 Sep 2005, Sten Daniel Sørsdal wrote:
>
>> Robert Watson wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> So if someone could generate some application pseudo-code that suggests
>>> what specifically is necessary from the socket layer in order for the
>>> application to function, we can talk
On Wed, 21 Sep 2005, Sten Daniel Sørsdal wrote:
Robert Watson wrote:
So if someone could generate some application pseudo-code that suggests
what specifically is necessary from the socket layer in order for the
application to function, we can talk about socket service extensions
that might su
Robert Watson wrote:
>
> So if someone could generate some application pseudo-code that suggests
> what specifically is necessary from the socket layer in order for the
> application to function, we can talk about socket service extensions
> that might support the application. For example, a way
On Wed, 21 Sep 2005, Andre Oppermann wrote:
I can think of a couple of uses to say IP DF on a UDP socket. Will cook
up a patch to add such a sysctl in a few hours.
The problem is that I think this solves only half of the likely problem.
If what application developers really want is a way to
Robert Watson wrote:
>
> On Wed, 21 Sep 2005, Sten Daniel Sørsdal wrote:
>
> >> For whatever reason, it turns out that you and only you have requested
> >> this feature. For typicaly network debugging applications, a raw
> >> socket is used, which allows the direct frobbing the the IP DF bit.
>
On Wed, 21 Sep 2005, Sten Daniel Sørsdal wrote:
For whatever reason, it turns out that you and only you have requested
this feature. For typicaly network debugging applications, a raw
socket is used, which allows the direct frobbing the the IP DF bit.
For example, in traceroute(8).
Could y
>
> For whatever reason, it turns out that you and only you have requested
> this feature. For typicaly network debugging applications, a raw socket
> is used, which allows the direct frobbing the the IP DF bit. For
> example, in traceroute(8).
>
> Could you tell us a bit more about the applic
> > I think there is a bug in syncache_respond().
I am sorry I was wrong. syncache_respond() does not have such bug.
Buggy thing was my brain...
> > In tcp_syncache.c rev 1.77, tcp_signature_compute() is called before
> > filling the TCP SACK Permitted option and the TCP EOL option. I guess
> >
Hi, everybody
Can anyone give some guidelines on tuning the following
parameters when the system is in polling mode and works in high
throughput network environment.
Thanks a lot!
/*
* EM_TIDV - Transmit Interrupt Delay Value
* Valid Range: 0-65535 (0=off)
* Defaul
> > I'm testing rfc2385 support with some of our equipment with current
> > as of a few days ago, and the support seems, well, rather broken.
tcpdump seems to be broken. I think the patch at the tail of this
e-mail needs to be applied to src/contrib/tcpdump/print-tcp.c.
Could you try this patch?
25 matches
Mail list logo
