Dmitry Pryanishnikov wrote:
>
> Hello!
>
> On Sun, 2 Apr 2006, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
>
>>> Why not? IMHO it will be very useful feature: think about e.g.
>>> traffic shaping for several different networks which are routed via
>>> the same
>>> ipsec tunnel. Without the enc0, you can only shape t
michael wrote:
Bonjour,
Ok,
So, i'll correct u're french because u seems to want to learn it and i
think u're french is not to bad
And for my problem do think about a begining of an answer ?
Hello,
Thank you for correcting my French. I need much practice!
As for your ipfw problem, I do
On Saturday 01 April 2006 11:19 pm, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
= > It is a FreeBSD/amd64-6.1 as of February 7, running on a signle Opteron
= > 244 (hence UP). Machine has 2Gb of RAM and the active interface is em0 in
= > full
=
= so the pipe acts just on traffic from/to the local host ?
No, as I wrote b
i am in a hotel which gives me an address from 10/8 on the ether.
i have it plugged into em0 on a -current system.
i have another machine on wireless out the ath0 port which is
configured as 192.168.0.1
my natd.conf is
dynamic yes
unregistered_only yes
interface em0
my ipfw.rules se
Hello!
On Sun, 2 Apr 2006, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
Why not? IMHO it will be very useful feature: think about e.g. traffic
shaping for several different networks which are routed via the same
ipsec tunnel. Without the enc0, you can only shape them together, e.g.:
why not shaping on the internal
On Sun, 2 Apr 2006, Dmitry Pryanishnikov wrote:
Hello!
On Fri, 31 Mar 2006, Bruce M Simpson wrote:
On Sat, Apr 01, 2006 at 12:28:13AM +0200, VANHULLEBUS Yvan wrote:
2) use enc0 support, which is actually pr kern/94829, and which should
be included soon in kernel.
Oh god! Not another ifn
Hello!
On Fri, 31 Mar 2006, Bruce M Simpson wrote:
On Sat, Apr 01, 2006 at 12:28:13AM +0200, VANHULLEBUS Yvan wrote:
2) use enc0 support, which is actually pr kern/94829, and which should
be included soon in kernel.
Oh god! Not another ifnet! NoOO!!
Why not? IMHO it will be ver
