[mhd_reg_logo.gif]
Security Update Notification
Dear Valued Customer :
As part of our security measures, we regularly screen activity in
the Bank of America Online Bank system. We recently contacted you
after noticing an issue on your account.We requested information
I just replaced a flakey Intel gigabit nic with a BCM5700-based 3Com nic,
thinking that would work better. Silly me. It seems there's a nasty
interaction between the chipset and the nic, which 3Com solved with a
driver release. From the Tyan site:
# Why can't I browse Network Neighborhood w
Hi,
I am trying to use a WRT54G with OpenWRT to do WPA with Radius auth, but I'm
not having much luck..
I have WPA-PSK going fine but when I try WPA-EAP it appears to associate OK
but no traffic passes..
I already sent a long message to the OpenWRT forums
http://forum.openwrt.org/viewtopic.php
Julian Elischer wrote this message on Tue, May 02, 2006 at 17:38 -0700:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> ok gotcha
>
>
> probably the pipes are stored in a list or something.
>
> check the code and see if a hash table woudl be better..
Looks like it's already a hash, though a bit small:
#define
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
ok gotcha
probably the pipes are stored in a list or something.
check the code and see if a hash table woudl be better..
Julian Elischer wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello.
I think I should give some 'real world' examples.
/etc/rc.firewall:
[Ss][Hh][Aa][Pp
Julian Elischer wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello.
I think I should give some 'real world' examples.
/etc/rc.firewall:
[Ss][Hh][Aa][Pp][Ee][Rr])
setup_loopback
. /etc/rc.shaper
${fwcmd} add 65000 pass all from any to any
;;
/etc/rc.shaper:
${fwcmd} pipe 1 config bw 512Kbit/s
${fwcm
I'm trying to install 6.0 RELEASE on a new laptop, and the NIC wasn't
recognized. It's a Broadcomm NetExtreme 57xx Gigabit NIC. Apparently
the bge driver doesn't work for that? Is there a driver available?
--
Paul Schmehl ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Adjunct Information Security Officer
The Universit
On 2006-05-02T14:19:14-0300, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> On 2006-05-01T22:12:00-0300, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>> Please, take a look in my previous post.
>>> I guess the problem lies with IPFW and dummynet.
>>> How do you shape your clients?
>>>
>>> Here we have (for each client):
>>>
>>> ipfw
An Update,
Last night I tried adding an em0 to the system. It yeilded no results. I
put the internal lans on em0 and ISP-B on bge0. I know the rules is
getting hits as the counters are moving up, but the redirection simply
refuses to happen. Anyone with any thoughts?
Relevant Kernel Options:
I'm running into a problem with some new dual Opteron servers we just
received yesterday on 6.1-STABLE (-RC now I suppose) amd64 updated as of
today. When booting, it sometimes fails to initialize the onboard
Broadcom gigabit Ethernet:
bge0: mem
0xfc9f-0xfc9f irq 26 at device 5.0 on pci2
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello.
I think I should give some 'real world' examples.
/etc/rc.firewall:
[Ss][Hh][Aa][Pp][Ee][Rr])
setup_loopback
. /etc/rc.shaper
${fwcmd} add 65000 pass all from any to any
;;
/etc/rc.shaper:
${fwcmd} pipe 1 config bw 512Kbit/s
${fwcmd} pipe 2 config bw 512Kb
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello.
I think I should give some 'real world' examples.
/etc/rc.firewall:
[Ss][Hh][Aa][Pp][Ee][Rr])
setup_loopback
. /etc/rc.shaper
${fwcmd} add 65000 pass all from any to any
;;
/etc/rc.shaper:
${fwcmd} pipe 1 config bw 512Kbit/s
${fwcmd} pipe 2 config bw 512Kb
I see that.
But if I got this right, I cannot set up speeds individually.
We have different speeds for each host.
Thanks for your time.
> On 2006-05-01T22:12:00-0300, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Please, take a look in my previous post.
>> I guess the problem lies with IPFW and dummynet.
>> How d
Hello.
I think I should give some 'real world' examples.
/etc/rc.firewall:
[Ss][Hh][Aa][Pp][Ee][Rr])
setup_loopback
. /etc/rc.shaper
${fwcmd} add 65000 pass all from any to any
;;
/etc/rc.shaper:
${fwcmd} pipe 1 config bw 512Kbit/s
${fwcmd} pipe 2 config bw 512Kbit/s
${fwcmd} add pipe 1
On Tue, May 02, 2006 at 02:38:35PM +0300, Iasen Kostov wrote:
> Have you done any performace comparisons with pf's NAT ? I realy would
> prefer libalias based kernel NAT than pf because libalias works better
> with ftp, irc dcc and things like that (VoIP would be nice too :P ). So
> the only reason
On 5/2/06, Iasen Kostov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[snip]
Btw what is the status of the multi-session to the same
point PPTP NAT (e.g call ID tracking) ?
PF's NAT has the same problem. We have this come up quite often on
pfSense where someone wants to make multiple connections through the
fir
On Sun, 2006-04-30 at 15:57 +0200, Paolo Pisati wrote:
> I just released a new revision of my libalias+ipfw work as a
> patchset for 6.x, get it here:
> http://mercurio.srv.dsi.unimi.it/~pisati/libalias/libalias-6.x.tgz
>
> To apply it:
>
> cp libalias_ipfw.patch /usr/src
> cd /usr/src
> patch
On Tue, 2 May 2006, Brian Candler wrote:
On Mon, May 01, 2006 at 11:38:39AM +1000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Would it be possible to improve the behaviour of the TCP protocol
implementation so that out-of-order reception was acceptable?
Possibly - but if your FreeBSD box is acting as a router
On Mon, May 01, 2006 at 11:38:39AM +1000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Would it be possible to improve the behaviour of the TCP protocol
> implementation so that out-of-order reception was acceptable?
Possibly - but if your FreeBSD box is acting as a router, and it re-orders
packets in transit to t
19 matches
Mail list logo
