Just saw the "watchdog" error using an Intel Pro Quad PT card...
more info: doing about 100Mbps plugged into a Cisco 2960:
Gi0/23mango-em2 connected a-full a-1000 10/100/1000BaseTX
Would setting the duplex and speed manually (instead of using auto-negotionation) help prevent t
> From: "Steven Hartland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2008 03:32:39 +0100
>
> >> Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 23:11:13 -0400 (EDT)
> >> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Brooks
> >> Am I the only one who would be happier if openssh were not in the base
> >> system at all? I always have to ins
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 23:11:13 -0400 (EDT)
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Brooks
Am I the only one who would be happier if openssh were not in the base
system at all? I always have to install the port anyway; having it in
the base just gives me more files I need to delete after an install.
(Hei
Tom Judge wrote this message on Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 15:01 -0500:
> Bill Moran wrote:
> >In response to R J <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >
> >>I am trying to use tcpdump (or snort, but they are both behaving the same
> >>in this case) to capture all the lines or contents of an msn
> >>chat session, the
Jack Vogel wrote:
> Did you ever install the fix to the 82573 NIC eeprom?
Just saw the "watchdog" error using an Intel Pro Quad PT card...
it has the '82571EB' chip on it.
-- Do those cards need the eeprom 'fix'?
-- or is related to kern/122928
-- how does one go about disabling the watchdog?
Brooks Davis wrote:
It is worth noting that over most people's WAN's the none cipher is
pretty pointless since you can do nearly 200Mbps with arcfour and a decent CPU
(IIRC the graphs are several years old).
In my case I'm CPU bound from other processes, so reducing SSH overhead
will have a n
Get these with GRE tunnel on
FreeBSD 7.0-STABLE FreeBSD 7.0-STABLE #5: Sun May 11 19:00:57 EDT
2008 :/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/ROUTER amd64
But do not get them with 7.0-RELEASE
Any ideas what changed? :) Wish there was some sort of changelog..
# of messages per second seems consistent with p
> Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2008 14:43:39 -0400
> From: Garrett Wollman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> < said:
>
> > Garrett Wollman wrote:
> >> Am I the only one who would be happier if openssh were not in the base
> >> system at all?
>
> > Quite possibly :)
>
> > I don't think it
< said:
> Garrett Wollman wrote:
>> Am I the only one who would be happier if openssh were not in the base
>> system at all?
> Quite possibly :)
> I don't think it's at all viable to ship FreeBSD without an ssh client
> in this day and age.
If that were what I had suggested, you might have a p
Someone I know got a
http://www.buy.com/prod/thinkpad-11a-b-g-wireless-lan-mini-pci-express-adapter-network-adapter/q/loc/101/201992199.html
and it works well.
-Boris
Paolo Pisati wrote:
Hi,
as the subjects says i'm looking for a freebsd-supported wifi express card.
I know i should look for
> Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 23:11:13 -0400 (EDT)
> From: Garrett Wollman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Brooks
> Davis writes:
>
> >On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 06:30:05PM -0700, Peter Losher wrote:
> >> FYI - HPN is already a build option in the opens
On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 01:02:07PM +0200, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> Brooks Davis wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 06:30:05PM -0700, Peter Losher wrote:
>>> Randy Bush wrote:
this has been a cause of great pain for a lng time.
http://www.psc.edu/networking/projects/hpn-ssh/
Hi,
as the subjects says i'm looking for a freebsd-supported wifi express card.
I know i should look for an atheros-based card, but it's really difficult to
find
which chip a card is using without trying it out first.
Googling around, it seems the belkin n express card is what i'm
looking for, b
Synopsis: RTM_MISS with the transit packets
Responsible-Changed-From-To: freebsd-bugs->freebsd-net
Responsible-Changed-By: remko
Responsible-Changed-When: Fri Jun 13 14:39:07 UTC 2008
Responsible-Changed-Why:
This looks like networking code :)
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=124540
__
Hi All,
I am running FreeBSD 6.2-release. I have been running PAT via natd
and ipfw for some time now and it runs great. However, I continue to
try and employ static NAT on this router, and as soon as I do so all
other clients lose routing. My natd.conf is as below:
unregistered_only
use_sockets
Garrett Wollman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Am I the only one who would be happier if openssh were not in the base
> system at all? I always have to install the port anyway; having it in
> the base just gives me more files I need to delete after an install.
Well, it's not going to get any bette
Garrett Wollman wrote:
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Brooks
Davis writes:
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 06:30:05PM -0700, Peter Losher wrote:
FYI - HPN is already a build option in the openssh-portable port.
I do think we should strongly consider adding the rest of it to the base.
Am I the only
Brooks Davis wrote:
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 06:30:05PM -0700, Peter Losher wrote:
Randy Bush wrote:
this has been a cause of great pain for a lng time.
http://www.psc.edu/networking/projects/hpn-ssh/
as openssh seems not to be fixing it (and i do not consider a 2mb fixed
buffer to be f
18 matches
Mail list logo
