Re: kern/140036: [iwn] [lor] lock order reversal with iwn0_com_lock and iwn0 softc lock

2009-10-31 Thread Benjamin Kaduk
The following reply was made to PR kern/140036; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Benjamin Kaduk To: Bernhard Schmidt Cc: bug-follo...@freebsd.org Subject: Re: kern/140036: [iwn] [lor] lock order reversal with iwn0_com_lock and iwn0 softc lock Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2009 19:24:59 -0400 (EDT) Indee

AR5212 wlan adapter

2009-10-31 Thread iprebeg
I have D-LINK DWA-520 adapter (AR5212 chipset) running on 8.0-BETA2 machine (same thing on -RC1). It appears as ath0 interface, but I can't get scan results. ifconfig ath0 up scan reports that it can't get scan results. When I add wpa_supplicant configuration and try to start it, it reports erro

Re: AR5212 wlan adapter

2009-10-31 Thread Bernhard Schmidt
On Saturday 31 October 2009 21:12:26 ipre...@freebsd.org wrote: > I have D-LINK DWA-520 adapter (AR5212 chipset) running on 8.0-BETA2 > machine (same thing on -RC1). It appears as ath0 interface, but I can't > get scan results. > ifconfig ath0 up scan > reports that it can't get scan results. > Wh

Re: Intel WiFi 5100/5300

2009-10-31 Thread Bernhard Schmidt
On Saturday 31 October 2009 18:46:31 Mykola Dzham wrote: > But sometimes i receive error: > > iwn0: iwn5000_post_alive: could not configure WiMAX coexistence, error 35 > iwn0: iwn_init_locked: could not initialize hardware, error 35 > > And adapter not work after this error kldunload if_iwn && kl

Re: Hi. /31 on ethernet links

2009-10-31 Thread Bjoern A. Zeeb
On Sat, 31 Oct 2009, Randy Bush wrote: Hi, However, I was simply reacting to the claim that it was *supported* by Cisco. have you noticed a difference in the bug rate between things that are 'supported by cisco' and those that just happen to be there? :) but you're right. i liked. our p2p

Re: Intel WiFi 5100/5300

2009-10-31 Thread Mykola Dzham
Bernhard Schmidt wrote: > On Sunday 25 October 2009 10:24:06 Bernhard Schmidt wrote: > > On Saturday 24 October 2009 21:41:39 Sam Fourman Jr. wrote: > > > Just wanted to make everyone aware that OpenBSD just 1 hour ago commited > > > a bunch of changes to their iwn driver. maybe some of it is usef

Re: Intel WiFi 5100/5300

2009-10-31 Thread Brandon Gooch
On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 8:26 AM, Bernhard Schmidt wrote: > On Sunday 25 October 2009 10:24:06 Bernhard Schmidt wrote: >> On Saturday 24 October 2009 21:41:39 Sam Fourman Jr. wrote: >> > Just wanted to make everyone aware that OpenBSD just 1 hour ago commited >> > a bunch of changes to their iwn dr

Re: Intel WiFi 5100/5300

2009-10-31 Thread Brandon Gooch
On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 8:26 AM, Bernhard Schmidt wrote: > On Sunday 25 October 2009 10:24:06 Bernhard Schmidt wrote: >> On Saturday 24 October 2009 21:41:39 Sam Fourman Jr. wrote: >> > Just wanted to make everyone aware that OpenBSD just 1 hour ago commited >> > a bunch of changes to their iwn dr

Re: Hi. /31 on ethernet links

2009-10-31 Thread Sebastian Hyrwall
Nikos Vassiliadis skrev: Sebastian Hyrwall wrote: Chuck Swiger skrev: inside, or using a /32 and an explicit default route via your ethernet interface. Unfortunetly that doesn't work. It just sets 192.1.1.2 as broadcast. Well wrapping a /31 inside of a /30 kinda defeats the purpose :)

Re: Hi. /31 on ethernet links

2009-10-31 Thread Nikos Vassiliadis
Sebastian Hyrwall wrote: Chuck Swiger skrev: inside, or using a /32 and an explicit default route via your ethernet interface. Unfortunetly that doesn't work. It just sets 192.1.1.2 as broadcast. Well wrapping a /31 inside of a /30 kinda defeats the purpose :) You could still use a /32 a

Re: Hi. /31 on ethernet links

2009-10-31 Thread Randy Bush
> However, I was simply reacting to the claim that it was *supported* by > Cisco. have you noticed a difference in the bug rate between things that are 'supported by cisco' and those that just happen to be there? :) but you're right. i liked. our p2ps are /30s, not /31s. and we're moving from

Re: Hi. /31 on ethernet links

2009-10-31 Thread sthaug
> > We have asked Cisco repeatedly, through official channels, whether > > they *support* /31 on Ethernet links. The answer is always that it > > *may* work, use at your own peril. > > i have managed O(10^3) ciscos in isp backbone(s). /31s predominate for > ether links in that space. though i su

Re: Hi. /31 on ethernet links

2009-10-31 Thread Randy Bush
> No, Cisco does not *support* it. They make it available, which is a > completely different story. > > We have asked Cisco repeatedly, through official channels, whether > they *support* /31 on Ethernet links. The answer is always that it > *may* work, use at your own peril. i have managed O(10^

Re: Hi. /31 on ethernet links

2009-10-31 Thread sthaug
> > A /31 subnet is only defined for point-to-point network links, per: > > > > http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3021.txt > > > > Ordinary ethernet links have BROADCAST flag set instead of POINTOPOINT. > > > > Regards, > Well how do I set the POINTOPOINT flag and remove the BROADCAST-flag on > e