> We should instead use names with exact sizes (16,32,64).
i think it should be pink
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
All,
Hoping for a little insight as I am not a user of multicast nor
do I know much about the servers that use them.
In my day job, I am helping with the moving of my company's product
from FreeBSD 6.2 (i386) to FreeBSD 8.0 (amd64). One of the daemons
wants to use 224.0.0.9 (routed? rip?) multi
If you can, add information abount AS numbers too.
ASN patch for 16-bit ASN's for V5 protocol:
http://www.stasyan.com/devel/ng_netflow/patch_asnum_1
Proto V5 can't handle 32-bit ASN unlike V9.
But I can't understand why it's not working for me,
AS numbers exists for first time after I was load AS
Hello,
I would like to integrate my Google Summer of Code project from the
last year [1]. In brief, it was about converting netstat(1) into a
library and providing a relatively clean API to access various
networking statistics available in the kernel. The project is far
from being complete, and
Hi.
Can somebody MFC this
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=141646 to 8.1?
--
Michael
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@f
Hi
FreeBSD 8.0-RELEASE-p3
$ ifconfig
em0: flags=8843 metric 0 mtu 9216
options=18b
ether 00:15:17:35:1c:76
media: Ethernet autoselect (1000baseT )
status: active
em1: flags=8843 metric 0 mtu 9216
options=18b
ether 00:15:17:35:1c:76
media: Et
On 6/22/10 3:12 PM, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 05:46:02PM -0400, Randall Stewart wrote:
Hi all:
I have had some fun in my day job playing with exchanging 64bit
numbers. Unfortunately
there is no ntohll() OR htonll() which would be the logical thing (for
us old farts) to use.
Ye
On Jun 22, 2010, at 6:12 PM, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 05:46:02PM -0400, Randall Stewart wrote:
Hi all:
I have had some fun in my day job playing with exchanging 64bit
numbers. Unfortunately
there is no ntohll() OR htonll() which would be the logical thing
(for
us old fart
On Jun 22, 2010, at 6:01 PM, Max Laier wrote:
On Tuesday 22 June 2010 23:46:02 Randall Stewart wrote:
Hi all:
I have had some fun in my day job playing with exchanging 64bit
numbers. Unfortunately
there is no ntohll() OR htonll() which would be the logical thing
(for
us old farts) to use.
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 05:46:02PM -0400, Randall Stewart wrote:
> Hi all:
>
> I have had some fun in my day job playing with exchanging 64bit
> numbers. Unfortunately
> there is no ntohll() OR htonll() which would be the logical thing (for
> us old farts) to use.
>
> Yes, I have found htobe6
On Tuesday 22 June 2010 23:46:02 Randall Stewart wrote:
> Hi all:
>
> I have had some fun in my day job playing with exchanging 64bit
> numbers. Unfortunately
> there is no ntohll() OR htonll() which would be the logical thing (for
> us old farts) to use.
>
> Yes, I have found htobe64() and frien
Hi all:
I have had some fun in my day job playing with exchanging 64bit
numbers. Unfortunately
there is no ntohll() OR htonll() which would be the logical thing (for
us old farts) to use.
Yes, I have found htobe64() and friends.. and that would work.. but I
still cannot
help but feeling w
>
> I managed to do an IP in IP tunnel with IPsec encryption between a
> FreeBSD and a cisco router running 12.1(mumble) several years ago.
>
> It is a desirable option if you want to use routing (e.g. ospf). You
> can't route an IPSec tunnel (actually, is this now possible with enc0
> inter
On 6/22/2010 2:22 PM, David DeSimone wrote:
Maciej Suszko wrote:
So as you write they should set: ??
10.20.0.1 (my ip on gif device)<-> 78.x<-> 95.x<-> 10.10.1.90
(other side)
Yes, indeed.
And additionaly I thing I should correct set spd policy to:
spdadd 10.20.0.1 10.10.1.90 any -P o
"David DeSimone" wrote:
> Maciej Suszko wrote:
> >
> > > So as you write they should set: ??
> > > 10.20.0.1 (my ip on gif device) <-> 78.x <-> 95.x <-> 10.10.1.90
> > > (other side)
> >
> > Yes, indeed.
> >
> > > And additionaly I thing I should correct set spd policy to:
> > >
> > > spdadd 1
Thanks guys, I try it tomorrow and I send you is it works or not.
Regards
Ralf
On Tue, 22 Jun 2010 20:26:36 +0200, Maciej Suszko
wrote:
> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I try to set VPN like I wrote earlier.
>> 78.x is server and this is not NAT. He dont forward anything.
>>
>> >> I try to configur
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I try to set VPN like I wrote earlier.
> 78.x is server and this is not NAT. He dont forward anything.
>
> >> I try to configure VPN over my server and my client
> >>
> >> Sheme is like this
> >> 78.x.x.x <--> 95.x.x.x <--> 10.10.1.90
> >
> > Are you trying to set up IPSEC
Maciej Suszko wrote:
>
> > So as you write they should set: ??
> > 10.20.0.1 (my ip on gif device) <-> 78.x <-> 95.x <-> 10.10.1.90
> > (other side)
>
> Yes, indeed.
>
> > And additionaly I thing I should correct set spd policy to:
> >
> > spdadd 10.20.0.1 10.10.1.90 any -P out ipsec
> > esp/tu
r...@dzie-ciuch.pl wrote:
>
> >> 78.x.x.x <--> 95.x.x.x <--> 10.10.1.90
>
> I try to set VPN like I wrote earlier.
> 78.x is server and this is not NAT. He dont forward anything.
>
> I try to set tunnel behing my server 78.x and gateway 95.x translating
> packets to 10.x. I can only set 78.x si
wrote:
>
>
> >> Hmmm, aggressive mode wasn't help :(
> >> Still I got only negotiation, so I try to send packets but I don't
> >> receive it at all.
> >>
> >> On my server 78.x.x.x I got ipfw allow all from any to any.
> >> On the other side 95.x.x.x they tell me that they do it everything
> >>
>> Hmmm, aggressive mode wasn't help :(
>> Still I got only negotiation, so I try to send packets but I don't
>> receive it at all.
>>
>> On my server 78.x.x.x I got ipfw allow all from any to any.
>> On the other side 95.x.x.x they tell me that they do it everything
>> right - only I can't conn
Hi,
I try to set VPN like I wrote earlier.
78.x is server and this is not NAT. He dont forward anything.
>> I try to configure VPN over my server and my client
>>
>> Sheme is like this
>> 78.x.x.x <--> 95.x.x.x <--> 10.10.1.90
>
> Are you trying to set up IPSEC tunneling of networks behind the
wrote:
>
> Hmmm, aggressive mode wasn't help :(
> Still I got only negotiation, so I try to send packets but I don't
> receive it at all.
>
> On my server 78.x.x.x I got ipfw allow all from any to any.
> On the other side 95.x.x.x they tell me that they do it everything
> right - only I can't co
r...@dzie-ciuch.pl wrote:
>
> I try to configure VPN over my server and my client
>
> Sheme is like this
> 78.x.x.x <--> 95.x.x.x <--> 10.10.1.90
Are you trying to set up IPSEC tunneling of networks behind these
gateways, or are you only trying to secure traffic between the peers
themselves?
Th
The following reply was made to PR kern/146517; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: Rui Paulo
To: Alex Kozlov
Cc: bug-follo...@freebsd.org,
vi...@unsane.co.uk
Subject: Re: kern/146517: [ath] [wlan] device timeouts for ath wlan device on
recent stable.
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 17:20:25 +0100
On 2
Hmmm, aggressive mode wasn't help :(
Still I got only negotiation, so I try to send packets but I don't receive
it at all.
On my server 78.x.x.x I got ipfw allow all from any to any.
On the other side 95.x.x.x they tell me that they do it everything right -
only I can't connect :(
Maybe I don't
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 05:11:58PM +0200, r...@dzie-ciuch.pl wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Thanks for help
>
> I new on it and I never use VPN, only I have to do it.
> Please tell me how to check peer's log? I dont know how to check it?
If that's really a firewall-1 as said in comments, I just don't
know.
Hi,
Thanks for help
I new on it and I never use VPN, only I have to do it.
Please tell me how to check peer's log? I dont know how to check it?
Have I change my racoon.conf exchange to aggressive, main?
I forgot send last time - on the other side is cisco router, maybe this is
important
Regar
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 03:59:50PM +0200, r...@dzie-ciuch.pl wrote:
>
> Hi,
Hi.
> I try to configure VPN over my server and my client
[]
According to your racoon's debug (and confirmed by tcpdump), racoon
tries to initiate a phase1 negociation, but never gets any answer from
peer, so you m
Hi,
I try to configure VPN over my server and my client
Sheme is like this
78.x.x.x <--> 95.x.x.x <--> 10.10.1.90
When I try to ping 10.10.1.90, all packets are lost.
What can I change to run it?
Thanks
This is my setting:
# setkey -DP
10.10.1.90[any] 78.x.x.x[any] any
in ipsec
The following reply was made to PR kern/146517; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: Alex Kozlov
To: Rui Paulo , bug-follo...@freebsd.org,
vi...@unsane.co.uk, s...@rm-rf.kiev.ua
Cc:
Subject: Re: kern/146517: [ath] [wlan] device timeouts for ath wlan device
on recent stable.
Date: Tue, 22
On 22.06.2010 11:18, Fernando Gont wrote:
Hi, folks,
I have a few questions wrt the FreeBSD TCP extended syncookies. I'm
quoting the explanation in the code:
* Timestamp we send:
* 31||0
*DDA5
*D = MD5 Digest (third d
Hello.
I'm having problems with 8.0/amd64 with the following card:
a...@pci0:1:0:0:class=0x02 card=0x83041043 chip=0x10261969
rev=0xb0 hdr=0x00
vendor = 'Attansic (Now owned by Atheros)'
device = 'PCI-E ETHERNET CONTROLLER (AR8121/AR8113 )'
class = network
Hi, folks,
I have a few questions wrt the FreeBSD TCP extended syncookies. I'm
quoting the explanation in the code:
> * Timestamp we send:
> * 31||0
> *DDA5
> *D = MD5 Digest (third dword) (only as filler)
What about the se
34 matches
Mail list logo
