FreeBSD tcp backoff problem

Hi, I work on a stack which is derived from FreeBSD. We have found a problem in the stack which shows up on TCP connections that do not use timestamps as follows. TCP backs off its retransmissions exponentially even though forward progress is being made. Appliance(our stack) sends data Client sen

Re: proxy-arp & mpd

Oleksandr Samoylyk пишет: Dear Community, I'm using proxy-arp for public ips for our clients in order to give them internet access using pptp-tunnels with mpd: # cat /usr/local/etc/mpd5/mpd.conf | grep arp set iface enable proxy-arp # uname -a FreeBSD xxx.xx.xxx 7.0-STABLE FreeBS

proxy-arp & mpd

Dear Community, I'm using proxy-arp for public ips for our clients in order to give them internet access using pptp-tunnels with mpd: # cat /usr/local/etc/mpd5/mpd.conf | grep arp set iface enable proxy-arp # uname -a FreeBSD xxx.xx.xxx 7.0-STABLE FreeBSD 7.0-STABLE #0: Tue May 13

Re: FD_SETSIZE (too many open file descriptors) + BIND

Ferdinand Goldmann wrote: Hi there, I just upgraded a FreeBSD 6.x machine to FreeBSD 6.3-STABLE, and now I'm seeing this same problem which has already been reported in different postings: named[51769]: socket: too many open file descriptors last message repeated 147 times I am following u

FD_SETSIZE (too many open file descriptors) + BIND

Hi there, I just upgraded a FreeBSD 6.x machine to FreeBSD 6.3-STABLE, and now I'm seeing this same problem which has already been reported in different postings: named[51769]: socket: too many open file descriptors last message repeated 147 times Obvously it is hitting the 1024 limit: # sock

Re: FreeBSD NAT-T patch integration [CFR/CFT]

VANHULLEBUS Yvan wrote: On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 08:33:57AM -0700, Sam Leffler wrote: VANHULLEBUS Yvan wrote: [] After some more testing, I found another issue: in udp4_espdecap(), when payload <= sizeof(uint64_t) + sizeof(struct esp), packet should not be discarded, but just ret

Re: FreeBSD NAT-T patch integration [CFR/CFT]

Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote: On Mon, 21 Jul 2008, Sam Leffler wrote: Hi Sam, We are still missing other things I think not mentioned elswhere like partial checksum recalculation. Please send me your specific issues; I haven't seen any comments about "partial checksum recalculations". So what has

Re: SOLVED: lo0 not in ioctl( SIOCGIFCONF )

On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 07:16:24AM +, Jens Rehsack wrote: > Brooks Davis wrote: >> On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 10:36:34PM +, Jens Rehsack wrote: >>> Brooks Davis wrote: On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 09:30:39PM +, Jens Rehsack wrote: > Brooks Davis wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> mayb

Re: moving sockbuf in to its own header

At Sun, 20 Jul 2008 16:07:29 -0700, Kip Macy wrote: > > Actually, I'd like to re-factor multiple parts of socketvar in to > separate files. > > Please provide feedback on the following: > > http://www.fsmware.com/socketvar_refactor.diff > Looks good to me. Best, George ___

Re: FreeBSD NAT-T patch integration [CFR/CFT]

On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 08:33:57AM -0700, Sam Leffler wrote: > VANHULLEBUS Yvan wrote: [] > >After some more testing, I found another issue: in udp4_espdecap(), > >when payload <= sizeof(uint64_t) + sizeof(struct esp), packet should > >not be discarded, but just returned for normal processing.

Re: SOLVED: lo0 not in ioctl( SIOCGIFCONF )

Brooks Davis wrote: On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 10:36:34PM +, Jens Rehsack wrote: Brooks Davis wrote: On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 09:30:39PM +, Jens Rehsack wrote: Brooks Davis wrote: Hi, maybe this question is better asked in this list ... I was searching why ports/net/p5-Net-Interface was