Re: strange resolver behavour

2010-10-13 Thread Doug Barton
On 10/13/2010 12:05 AM, Eugene Grosbein wrote: On 13.10.2010 01:39, Doug Barton wrote: I care about my resolver behavior. Ok, well, that's working as advertised, so no problems then. That's fine. And how about host(1)? It looks for MX record for synthetic domain names using suffixes from /e

Re: help tune

2010-10-13 Thread Dmitriy Zamuraev
> Help me pls, to tune those drops. Clear _ALL_ tuning, use kernel-config-option maxusers 512 NOTE: kern.maxusers in /boot/loader.conf may not been used on some releases, but in newer releases must to be. > I do this tuning: > /etc/sysctl.conf > hw.pci.enable_msix=1 > hw.pci.enable_msi=1 > k

help tune

2010-10-13 Thread Коньков Евгений
Hi, Freebsd-net. Help me pls, to tune those drops. fastvpn# netstat -s udp: 268701 datagrams received 0 with incomplete header 1 with bad data length field 12 with bad checksum 5229 with no checksum 208022 dropped due to no socket

Re: src address issue

2010-10-13 Thread Dmitriy Zamuraev
you use default route from R.E.A.L IP, configure static route to network/host 10.11.19.1 via you 10.11.8.X gate. > Why with configured ip addresses > fastvpn# ifconfig sis0 > sis0: flags=8843 metric 0 mtu 1500 > options=82008 > ether 00:0b:6a:a6:0c:f0 > inet 10.11.8.1

src address issue

2010-10-13 Thread Коньков Евгений
Hi, all Why with configured ip addresses fastvpn# ifconfig sis0 sis0: flags=8843 metric 0 mtu 1500 options=82008 ether 00:0b:6a:a6:0c:f0 inet 10.11.8.18 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 10.11.8.255 inet6 fe80::20b:6aff:fea6:cf0%sis0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x1 inet

Re: [PATCH] Netdump for review and testing -- preliminary version

2010-10-13 Thread Ryan Stone
On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 9:15 PM, Robert Watson wrote: > + /* > +* get and fill a header mbuf, then chain data as an > extended > +* mbuf. > +*/ > + MGETHDR(m, M_DONTWAIT, MT_DATA); > > The idea of calling into the mbuf allo

Re: SV: VPLS implementation

2010-10-13 Thread Julian Elischer
On 10/13/10 3:36 AM, sth...@nethelp.no wrote: So the question is - *why* would you want FreeBSD to support VPLS? And what exactly do you mean by implementing VPLS on FreeBSD? If you want a multipoint bridge across several interfaces, this can be done. If you want something with MPLS support (lab

Re: if_ndis: fix for panic with VIMAGE

2010-10-13 Thread Paul B Mahol
On 10/12/10, Paul B Mahol wrote: > On 10/11/10, Paul B Mahol wrote: >> Hi, >> >> There is no single valid reason to call rt_ifmsg() in ndis_linksts_done() >> >> Patch attached. >> > Ping. Pong. ___ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freeb

Re: [PATCH] Netdump for review and testing -- preliminary version

2010-10-13 Thread Ed Maste
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 01:04:54PM +0200, Attilio Rao wrote: > 2010/10/9 Robert Watson : > > (1) Did you consider using tftp as the network dump protocol, rather than a > > custom protocol? ??It's also a simple UDP-based, ACKed file transfer > > protocol, with the advantage that it's widely suppo

Re: kern/130628: [nfs] NFS / rpc.lockd deadlock on 7.1-R

2010-10-13 Thread Eric Crist
The following reply was made to PR kern/130628; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Eric Crist To: bug-follo...@freebsd.org, bv...@math.ualberta.ca Cc: Subject: Re: kern/130628: [nfs] NFS / rpc.lockd deadlock on 7.1-R Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2010 06:51:55 -0500 Is there any follow-up to this bug? W

Re: [PATCH] Netdump for review and testing -- preliminary version

2010-10-13 Thread Attilio Rao
2010/10/9 Robert Watson : > On Fri, 8 Oct 2010, Attilio Rao wrote: > >>> GENERAL FRAMEWORK ARCHITECTURE >>> >>> Netdump is composed, right now, by an userland "server" and a kernel >>> "client". The former is run on the target machine (where the dump will >>> phisically happen) and it is responsibl

Re: SV: VPLS implementation

2010-10-13 Thread sthaug
> > So the question is - *why* would you want FreeBSD to support VPLS? And > > what exactly do you mean by implementing VPLS on FreeBSD? If you want a > > multipoint bridge across several interfaces, this can be done. If you want > > something with MPLS support (labels etc) it's a completely differ

Re: VPLS implementation

2010-10-13 Thread sthaug
> > Are there any plans or ongoing work to implement VPLS in the network > > stack? > > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Private_LAN_Service > > If you don't need interoperability with others, you can > theoretically achieve something like VPLS using if_bridge, > if_gif, EtherIP and the "

SV: VPLS implementation

2010-10-13 Thread Jon Otterholm
> -Ursprungligt meddelande- > Från: sth...@nethelp.no [mailto:sth...@nethelp.no] > Skickat: den 13 oktober 2010 11:32 > Till: Jon Otterholm > Kopia: freebsd-net@freebsd.org > Ämne: Re: VPLS implementation > > > > Are there any plans or ongoing work to implement VPLS in the network > > > st

Re: VPLS implementation

2010-10-13 Thread Nikos Vassiliadis
Jon Otterholm wrote: Are there any plans or ongoing work to implement VPLS in the network stack? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Private_LAN_Service If you don't need interoperability with others, you can theoretically achieve something like VPLS using if_bridge, if_gif, EtherIP and

Re: strange resolver behavour

2010-10-13 Thread Eugene Grosbein
On 13.10.2010 01:39, Doug Barton wrote: >> I care about my resolver behavior. > > Ok, well, that's working as advertised, so no problems then. That's fine. And how about host(1)? It looks for MX record for synthetic domain names using suffixes from /etc/resolv.conf Hopefully it does not find bu