Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
On Thu, 14 Feb 2008, Matthew Grooms wrote:
Hi,
There is a bug in /usr/src/sys/netipsec/key.c in FreeBSD KAME IPsec
sources.
netipsec/ is not KAME IPsec.
Right, my mistake. FAST IPsec then.
If an spd_delete2 message is submitted for an invalid policy id, the
kernel
> Eugene, I take it the fix that applies on Boris's case is the
> M_BCAST|M_MCAST setting on the mbuf? I would like to test/commit this.
I see you have already got it :-)
> Also, why to you add support for adding a bridge to a lagg interface?
I needed to force lagg(4) to aggregate two EtherIP tu
Dear Dave,
and, what hz value do you use at the server?
sysctl -a | grep hz
It seems, you are missing incomming packets because the system is busy.
For this high network load, you should use 1000HZ.
(Thats a kernel compile option).
Kind regards,
Ingo Flaschberger
__
Dear Dave,
intr_queue_drops was rising very quickly, after changing queue_maxlen to 500
(from 50) the problems all went away. What's a reasonable value for that for
a high load box (5000+ interrupts a second) ?
http://devwiki.pfsense.org/Tuning?show_comments=1
they set it to 3000
intel em-car
Ingo, you are a lifesaver!
intr_queue_drops was rising very quickly, after changing queue_maxlen to 500
(from 50) the problems all went away. What's a reasonable value for that for
a high load box (5000+ interrupts a second) ?
Also, while over a 1000 pings have gone through fine now, a minute or
# sysctl -a | fgrep ip.intr_qu
net.inet.ip.intr_queue_maxlen: 50
net.inet.ip.intr_queue_drops: 9506223
What do those drops mean?
Thanks
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Ingo Flaschberger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2008 9:28 PM
To: Dave Raven
Cc: freebsd-net@freeb
Dear Dave,
some more ideas:
sysctl -a | fgrep ip.intr_qu
Kind regards,
Ingo Flaschberger
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Dear Dave,
do you use firewall?
what rules?
do you use traffic shaping?
# netstat -m
4078/14240/67584 mbufs in use (current/peak/max):
4078 mbufs allocated to data
4065/14168/33792 mbuf clusters in use (current/peak/max)
do you have now traffic-loss?
Kind regards,
Ingo Flasch
Hi Ingo,
# netstat -m
4078/14240/67584 mbufs in use (current/peak/max):
4078 mbufs allocated to data
4065/14168/33792 mbuf clusters in use (current/peak/max)
Thanks
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Ingo Flaschberger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2008 9:21 PM
Dear Dave,
Also - sometimes during my testing I see this message, it's hard to make it
happen but its been popping up I'm not sure if its related/different etc --
"sendto: No buffer space available"
try:
netstat -m
Kind regards,
Ingo Flaschberger
Also - sometimes during my testing I see this message, it's hard to make it
happen but its been popping up I'm not sure if its related/different etc --
"sendto: No buffer space available"
Thanks
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Ingo Flaschberger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, Fe
Hi Ingo,
Unfortunately I am stuck using FreeBSD 4.11 for this, so the em
driver options don't include rx_processing_limit. They do have rx and tx
_int_delay which I have played with but hasn't made a different.
As I understand polling might help if I had a load problem but my processor
is
On Tue, 26 Feb 2008, ithilgore wrote:
Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
On 2008-02-23 02:37, ithilgore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
ithilgore wrote:
I was looking at the differences between some old FreeBSD code
and the one of 7.0-RC1 and was wondering about a change
in inet_ntoa.c
/* 7.0-RC1 ***
Dear Dave,
I have set my icmplim to 1024. When it was 200 I would sometimes get a
warning about an OPEN port RST - which was also strange to me (that it was
open not closed). I suspected that it was because 5% of my packets where
being dropped though.
The server is under reasonable load (networ
I have set my icmplim to 1024. When it was 200 I would sometimes get a
warning about an OPEN port RST - which was also strange to me (that it was
open not closed). I suspected that it was because 5% of my packets where
being dropped though.
The server is under reasonable load (networking wise) aro
Dear Dave,
Unfortunately I don't have most of that information, I can try to
get more but my question is if hping works and ping doesn't shouldn't I be
looking on the box itself not at the network ?
With icmp I think about icmp bandwidth limit.
sysctl -a | grep icmp
net.inet.icmp.icmpl
Hi,
Unfortunately I don't have most of that information, I can try to
get more but my question is if hping works and ping doesn't shouldn't I be
looking on the box itself not at the network ?
Thanks again
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Ingo Flaschberger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
S
Dear Dave,
Its hard to tell but it appears like all protocols are dropping.
Tried to replace the cable?
What product/vendor is the switch?
Is it manageable?
Is flow-control enabled at the switch?
How much traffic does the switch handle?
How much traffic does the server handle?
bye,
Hi,
Its hard to tell but it appears like all protocols are dropping.
Thanks
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Ingo Flaschberger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2008 8:04 PM
To: Dave Raven
Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Subject: RE: Hping/Ping
Dear Daven,
>
Dear Daven,
I get the drops with other IP addresses on the same switch as well.
Also from another unit I can ping through the switch to the router without
any problems.
Given that hping works is it possible that it's a switch/network related
problem - I had thought it would definitely b
Christian Meutes wrote:
Hi,
can anyone say something to the current status of "running IPv6 in Jail"?
Is it somehow possible?
Thanks,
Christian
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscr
On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 11:51:38AM -0500, Boris Kochergin wrote:
> Eugene Grosbein wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 09:57:48AM -0500, Boris Kochergin wrote:
>>
>>
>>> bridge0: flags=8843 metric 0 mtu
>>> 1500
>>>ether 3e:7f:e8:ef:f6:a4
>>>inet 192.168.0.1 netmask 0xff00 bro
Hi Ingo,
I get the drops with other IP addresses on the same switch as well.
Also from another unit I can ping through the switch to the router without
any problems.
Given that hping works is it possible that it's a switch/network related
problem - I had thought it would definitely be a p
Dear Dave,
Yes there are no hops, I'm just pinging the router infront of me.
The silbpi card uses the em driver - I tried the onboard em cards but had
the same problem..
I've also connected a cable to my other card, silbpi0, which does no traffic
and pinging on there is stable. That se
Hi,
Yes there are no hops, I'm just pinging the router infront of me.
# netstat -nI silbpi1
NameMtu Network Address Ipkts IerrsOpkts Oerrs
Coll
silbp 1500 00:e0:ed:0c:a8:5d 1009627153 2459 1323071177 0
0
silbp 1500 x.x.x.x x.x.x.x 606092 - 132
Dear Dave,
Also, if I use tethereal to sniff for icmp packets to the host I'm
pinging I see them all even though I am getting drops --
23 packets transmitted, 22 packets received, 4% packet loss
The last two lines of my tethereal --
45 22.214610 x.x.x.x -> y.y.y.y ICMP Echo (ping) re
Bruce Evans wrote:
On Tue, 26 Feb 2008, ithilgore wrote:
Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
On 2008-02-23 02:37, ithilgore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
ithilgore wrote:
I was looking at the differences between some old FreeBSD code
and the one of 7.0-RC1 and was wondering about a change
in inet_ntoa.c
Hello again,
Also, if I use tethereal to sniff for icmp packets to the host I'm
pinging I see them all even though I am getting drops --
23 packets transmitted, 22 packets received, 4% packet loss
The last two lines of my tethereal --
45 22.214610 x.x.x.x -> y.y.y.y ICMP Echo (ping) req
Eugene Grosbein wrote:
On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 09:57:48AM -0500, Boris Kochergin wrote:
bridge0: flags=8843 metric 0 mtu
1500
ether 3e:7f:e8:ef:f6:a4
inet 192.168.0.1 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 192.168.0.255
id 00:00:00:00:00:00 priority 32768 hellotime 2 fwddelay 15
Hi all,
I have a problem where my machine is dropping packets and pings
after a few days of running (under load). The reason I'm mailing the -net
list is because I seem to have tracked down something I'm just not sure
where to look now. If I use ping I get 5% drops --
872 packets transmitt
On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 09:57:48AM -0500, Boris Kochergin wrote:
> bridge0: flags=8843 metric 0 mtu
> 1500
>ether 3e:7f:e8:ef:f6:a4
>inet 192.168.0.1 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 192.168.0.255
>id 00:00:00:00:00:00 priority 32768 hellotime 2 fwddelay 15
>maxage 20
Hi, list. As per the comment in the if_bridge(4) man page, I'm trying to
tunnel Ethernet through IP for the purpose of having multiple 802.11
"access points" all feed into a "concentrator," which will perform NAT.
I have the concentrator with the following setup (gif0 through gif1 are
IPv4-over
On Tue, 26 Feb 2008, Christian Meutes wrote:
Hi,
can anyone say something to the current status of "running IPv6 in Jail"?
Is it somehow possible?
it's coming. expect a patch to hit this list in march. for more see my
status report:
http://www.freebsd.org/news/status/report-2007-10-2007-12.ht
On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 3:43 AM, Andrew Snow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I can confirm that FreeBSD 7.0-RC1 can route packets at 1gbps. I used a
> late-model Supermicro Xeon server which has two gigabit NICs on a
> PCI-express "4x" lane.
>
> With the new em driver improvements in 7 it uses very
Synopsis: [ipv6] deadlock occurs if a tunnel goes down while there are tcp6
connections opened
State-Changed-From-To: open->closed
State-Changed-By: gavin
State-Changed-When: Tue Feb 26 10:31:57 UTC 2008
State-Changed-Why:
Close, kern/116172 is a duplicate of this PR, but has much more
informati
On Mon, 2008-02-25 at 15:41 +0200, Yehonatan Yossef wrote:
> I'm looking into the syslogd capabilities at the moment, it might be
> enough.
> I've tried following the serial console setup you've pointed, but when I
> added the 'console="comconsole"' to loader.conf the OS hanged during
> boot time,
On 2008-02-26 11:51, ithilgore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
>> I don't see ucp[] in RELENG_6, RELENG_7 or CURRENT. Where did you get
>> the version shown as `7.0-RC1' above?
>
> I got the source code from the ftp.freebsd.org and I just downloaded
> 7.0-RC3 to be certain.
Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
On 2008-02-23 02:37, ithilgore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
ithilgore wrote:
I was looking at the differences between some old FreeBSD code
and the one of 7.0-RC1 and was wondering about a change
in inet_ntoa.c
/* 7.0-RC1 **/
sprintf(buf, "%d.
Hi,
can anyone say something to the current status of "running IPv6 in Jail"?
Is it somehow possible?
Thanks,
Christian
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[E
Hi,
can anyone say something to the current status of "running IPv6 in Jail"?
Is it somehow possible?
Thanks,
Christian
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[E
40 matches
Mail list logo
