Hi,
> On Sat, 11 Feb 2006 03:58:10 +0100
> [EMAIL PROTECTED](Frank Steinborn) said:
> i'm trying to delete an IPv6-address from my gif-interface (named
> blazing):
>
> shodan:~# ifconfig blazing inet6 delete 2001:1638:17ad::9
> ifconfig: ioctl (SIOCDIFADDR): Can't assign requested addr
> On Sat, 11 Feb 2006 02:14:11 -0500,
> Kris Kennaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>> >> Sorry, not really (we've not got a test environment to reproduce it).
>> >> But from a quick review of nd6.c, there seems to be one thing that is
>> >> obviously wrong. The possible bug has been there s
On Sat, Feb 11, 2006 at 03:38:56PM +0900, JINMEI Tatuya / [EMAIL
PROTECTED]@C#:H wrote:
> > On Fri, 10 Feb 2006 22:50:25 -0500,
> > Kris Kennaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> >> Sorry, not really (we've not got a test environment to reproduce it).
> >> But from a quick review of nd6.c,
> On Fri, 10 Feb 2006 22:50:25 -0500,
> Kris Kennaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>> Sorry, not really (we've not got a test environment to reproduce it).
>> But from a quick review of nd6.c, there seems to be one thing that is
>> obviously wrong. The possible bug has been there since rev.
On Tue, Feb 07, 2006 at 07:16:09PM +0900, JINMEI Tatuya / [EMAIL
PROTECTED]@C#:H wrote:
> > On Tue, 7 Feb 2006 00:45:02 -0500,
> > Kris Kennaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> >> I ran ntpdate on an amd64 system with ipv6 enabled and a skewed clock
> >> (ntpdate stepped it back by about a
Hello,
i'm trying to delete an IPv6-address from my gif-interface (named
blazing):
shodan:~# ifconfig blazing inet6 delete 2001:1638:17ad::9
ifconfig: ioctl (SIOCDIFADDR): Can't assign requested address
I tried 2001:1638:17ad:0:0:0:0:9 too without success. Adding the
address (ifconfig blazing i
On Fri, 10 Feb 2006 14:57:26 -0500, in sentex.lists.freebsd.net you
wrote:
>
>"If your system runs out of CPU (idle times are perpetually 0%) then
>you need to consider upgrading the CPU or moving to an SMP motherboard
>(multiple CPU's), or perhaps you need to revisit the programs that are
>caus
On Friday 10 February 2006 20:54, Julian Elischer wrote:
> Marcos Bedinelli wrote:
> > Hello all,
> >
> > thanks for the replies. Most of you have suggested that I turn on
> > polling and give it a try. The machine is in production, hence I need
> > to schedule downtime for that.
> >
> > The system
Hi Andre,
If I'm not mistaken, *you* converted ipfw to use pfil(9).
During the conversion, the following bug was introduced.
When forwarding fragmented packets through a dummynet pipe
(ip_input -> ip_forward -> ip_output -> pipe -> ip_output)
the last ip_output() in the chain that does the actual
> Hello all,
>
> thanks for the replies. Most of you have suggested that I turn on
> polling and give it a try. The machine is in production, hence I need
> to schedule downtime for that.
>
> The system is mainly being used as a dedicated router. It runs OSPF,
> BGP and IPFW (around 150 rules)
Marcos Bedinelli wrote:
Hi Julian,
On 10-Feb-06, at 14:54, Julian Elischer wrote:
I have found that most people can optimise there ipfw rulests
considerably.
for example: a first rule of:
1 allow ip from any to any in recv {inside interfacfe}
2 allow ip from any to any out xmit {inside int
Marcos Bedinelli (bedinelli) writes:
>
> "If your system runs out of CPU (idle times are perpetually 0%) then
> you need to consider upgrading the CPU or moving to an SMP motherboard
> (multiple CPU's), or perhaps you need to revisit the programs that are
> causing the load and try to optimize
Hi Julian,
On 10-Feb-06, at 14:54, Julian Elischer wrote:
I have found that most people can optimise there ipfw rulests
considerably.
for example: a first rule of:
1 allow ip from any to any in recv {inside interfacfe}
2 allow ip from any to any out xmit {inside interface}
will cut your ipfw
Hi,
On 10-Feb-06, at 13:06, Chuck Swiger wrote:
Marcos Bedinelli wrote:
[ ... ]
mull [~]$vmstat -i
interrupt total rate
irq1: atkbd03466 0
irq6: fdc010 0
irq13: npx0
Marcos Bedinelli wrote:
Hello all,
thanks for the replies. Most of you have suggested that I turn on
polling and give it a try. The machine is in production, hence I need
to schedule downtime for that.
The system is mainly being used as a dedicated router. It runs OSPF,
BGP and IPFW (aroun
Can someone make a little bit clear about vmstat -i.
What exactly we should look for?
On my systems i have also high total column.
On 2/10/06, Chuck Swiger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Marcos Bedinelli wrote:
> [ ... ]
> > mull [~]$vmstat -i
> > interrupt total
Marcos Bedinelli wrote:
[ ... ]
> mull [~]$vmstat -i
> interrupt total rate
> irq1: atkbd03466 0
> irq6: fdc010 0
> irq13: npx01 0
> irq14: ata0
Hello all,
thanks for the replies. Most of you have suggested that I turn on
polling and give it a try. The machine is in production, hence I need
to schedule downtime for that.
The system is mainly being used as a dedicated router. It runs OSPF,
BGP and IPFW (around 150 rules). OSPF and BGP
Marcos Bedinelli wrote:
[ ... ]
> Does anyone know whether a dual CPU system can help us improve the
> situation? I was wondering if the software interrupt threads would be
> divided between the two processors.
>
> Any help/insight is greatly appreciated
Adding SMP into the mix makes thing more c
Marcos Bedinelli (bedinelli) writes:
> I should've mentioned before that we are trying to save some money
> here, therefore the idea is to add a second 2.4GHz Intel Xeon CPU to
> our current box.
>
> However, if there is consensus that a second processor will buy us
> nothing, we'll need to acq
Hi S.I,
I should've mentioned before that we are trying to save some money
here, therefore the idea is to add a second 2.4GHz Intel Xeon CPU to
our current box.
However, if there is consensus that a second processor will buy us
nothing, we'll need to acquire a new system and will consider yo
You must migrate to AMD Opteron. INTEL very very suxX.
On Fri, 10 Feb 2006 08:46:00 -0500
Marcos Bedinelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> We have a 2.4GHz Intel Xeon machine running FreeBSD 6.0-RELEASE-p2. Due
> to heavy network traffic, CPU utilization on that machine is 100%:
>
Hello all,
We have a 2.4GHz Intel Xeon machine running FreeBSD 6.0-RELEASE-p2. Due
to heavy network traffic, CPU utilization on that machine is 100%:
===
mull [~]$top -S
last pid: 94989; load averages: 3.69, 4.02, 4.36 up
25+07:21:34 14:51:43
105 processes: 2 running, 46 slee
Hi list,
Since my last protupgrade i am having severe startup problems.
/usr/local/etc/rc.d/slapd.sh had already taken quite some time in the
past, but now it has become even worse.
I interrupted with ^C after a few minutes, and when i tried to login as
root on the console, i had to wait again
24 matches
Mail list logo
