Hi,
well thas gonna take lots of time since i didn't program few years now
specially in C.
when the maintainer left the module? it might give a spot if other modules
written by other are relevant.
i wonder how how other MPD users deal with problems like these since i
don't think I'm the only only
Hi,
>It seems you have really complex network configuration(ipfw(4),
>lagg(4), dummynet(4), bridge(4) and ipsec(4) etc). Finding out
>simplest network setup that shows the issue would be required here.
hmm.. i actually don't use lagg nor bridge nor ipsec, i compile them for
any future use that mig
you're right but we can't assign tow parent interface to one vlan in
freebsd therefore i define two vlans with the one vlan id.
although we can do it by blow command but it's not work too:
ifconfig gbeth0.10 create
ifconfig msk0.10 create
ifconfig
gbeth0.10: flags=8842 metric 0 mtu 1500
options
On 12/18/11 5:20 AM, Sami Halabi wrote:
Hi,
i actually tried that (setting REKEY to 1500 instead of 1000) but i still
see this message in the /var/log/messages...
The ng_mppc author is no longer working in this field and while the
mppc module has been mecahnically updated to suit changes in net
The following reply was made to PR kern/144572; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: "Eugene M. Zheganin"
To: bug-follo...@freebsd.org, e...@norma.perm.ru
Cc:
Subject: Re: kern/144572: [carp] CARP preemption mode traffic partially goes
to backup node
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 10:36:47 +0600
Please
On Sat, Dec 17, 2011 at 06:49:48PM +0200, Sami Halabi wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've moved to a new server with bge card driver, similar configuration:
> /etc/sysctl.conf
> net.inet.flowtable.enable=0
> net.inet.ip.fastforwarding=1
> kern.ipc.somaxconn=8192
> kern.ipc.shmmax=2147483648
> kern.ipc.maxsocket
On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 08:10:20PM +0100, Andrea Venturoli wrote:
> On 12/16/11, Eugene Grosbein wrote:
>
> (Sorry Eugene, I didn't get your message until I searched the web).
>
> > Do you use NAT? man ipfw clearly states:
> >
> > ipfw nat is not compatible with
> > the TCP segmentation o
OH, and a bit further comment... I maintain all the Intel based 1 and 10G
drivers,
which means dev/e1000 and dev/ixgbe. ALL Intel released devices right up to
the present are supported in these drivers as of the source in HEAD. Of
course
we (Intel) are always working on new hardware, and thus I a
Kevin is correct :)
When it comes to the man pages the problem is that even though we have
a docs group internally, they are not really independent, and doing
development
and support on the drivers keeps me fully occupied.. so the docs tend to lag
a bit.
If you have specific questions I am lurkin
On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 8:33 AM, Tanel Rebane wrote:
> I'm trying to wrap my head around the igb(4) drivers. As I've understood
> this driver is written by Intel and they distribute it from their Download
> Center. The driver also seems to be included in the default installation of
> FreeBSD (yet
15 декабря 2011, 05:08 от "Bjoern A. Zeeb" :
>
> On 14. Dec 2011, at 23:11 , Andrey Smagin wrote:
>
> > Hi All! I found next issue with gif tunnels.
> > gif3 work look's like mpd without tcpmssfix - google opened, but another
> > sites waiting read forever
>
> Given it's RFC1918 addresses, t
I'm trying to wrap my head around the igb(4) drivers. As I've understood
this driver is written by Intel and they distribute it from their Download
Center. The driver also seems to be included in the default installation of
FreeBSD (yet I can't seem to find anything relevant in src/sys/dev/igb).
Ho
first of all, you should name and number you vlan same, if it's clan10
on the one side, then it's vlan10 on the other side and in betweeen.
then (though you have to do it first of all), you should understand
how vlan's work, and after that connect ports to each other according
to your scheme.
--
On 12/16/11, Eugene Grosbein wrote:
(Sorry Eugene, I didn't get your message until I searched the web).
> Do you use NAT? man ipfw clearly states:
>
> ipfw nat is not compatible with
> the TCP segmentation offloading (TSO). Thus, to reliably nat
your net-
> work traffic, please di
On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 3:58 AM, Alexander V. Chernikov
wrote:
> Pawel Tyll wrote:
>> Hi lists,
>>
>> Are there any plans to implement IPv6 tables in ipfw? It would seem
>> that our gov. may want to force us into IPv6 in 6 months ;)
> I've got working implementation for IPv4+IPv6 and interface tab
Hi,
i actually tried that (setting REKEY to 1500 instead of 1000) but i still
see this message in the /var/log/messages...
help,
Sami
On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 2:22 PM, Julian H. Stacey wrote:
> Reference:
> > From: Sami Halabi
>
> Please do not top post.
>
> Sami Halabi wrote:
> > Hi,
>
Reference:
> From: Sami Halabi
Please do not top post.
Sami Halabi wrote:
> Hi,
> I'm using FBSD8.2-R-p4,
You omitted to say that in first post.
> i just commented that the only discussion i found
> is for old releases without fedback if that helped.
>
> I appreciate any help.
Now p
Hi Alexander,
> I've got working implementation for IPv4+IPv6 and interface tables:
Lately every time I have some kind of problem, you come with a
solution ready :>
Thanks for the heads-up!
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists
Pawel Tyll wrote:
> Hi lists,
>
> Are there any plans to implement IPv6 tables in ipfw? It would seem
> that our gov. may want to force us into IPv6 in 6 months ;)
I've got working implementation for IPv4+IPv6 and interface tables:
15:56 [0] zfsbase# /usr/obj/usr/src/sbin/ipfw/ipfw table 2 list
1
Hi lists,
Are there any plans to implement IPv6 tables in ipfw? It would seem
that our gov. may want to force us into IPv6 in 6 months ;)
Cheers.
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubsc
20 matches
Mail list logo
