What Jack means is to swap ports 0/1 with ports 2/3, so that 0/1 are B2B with
the other i350 and ports 2/3 are connected to the switch. Do this on both
sides. The reason for this is because there is a bridge between ports 0/1 and
2/3, so it is possible that the bridge is causing problems when co
The following reply was made to PR kern/177139; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: da...@dr.eclipse.co.uk
To: bug-follo...@freebsd.org
Cc:
Subject: Fwd: Re: kern/177139: [igb] igb drops ethernet ports 2 and 3
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2013 17:31:57 +
--=_0e01cef1795d0a99970a4500053df16b
Content-Ty
The following reply was made to PR kern/177139; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: Jack Vogel
To: bug-follo...@freebsd.org, da...@dr.eclipse.co.uk
Cc:
Subject: Re: kern/177139: [igb] igb drops ethernet ports 2 and 3
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2013 10:04:14 -0700
--20cf3078114c10128504d872541e
Content-
Hi,
It seems that route entry (i.e. ro->ro_rt) is read/modified without lock in
ip_output. The code snippet below is from FreeBSD 10 and other releases are
similar to this. Can somebody tell me why it is okay or a design decision of
doing this? Appreciated in advance...
114 int
115 ip_output(
Here is the output with a better formatting:
http://pastebin.com/arrRsM78
What I would like to understand is why lo1 shows Obytes (incrementing)
while bce0 IP's don't
lo1 is a using NAT
also the sum of lo1 (not including the Hi all, I want to know the total of bytes in and out of each IP addre
You need a kernel with TCP_SIGNATURE option and insert policy routes with
setkey.
On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 4:06 PM, Vladislav Prodan wrote:
>
> FreeBSD 8.2-STABLE
> quagga-0.99.21 Free RIPv1, RIPv2, OSPFv2, BGP4, IS-IS route software
>
> BGP.as1(config-router)# neighbor XXX.XXX.YYY.YYY p
FreeBSD 8.2-STABLE
quagga-0.99.21 Free RIPv1, RIPv2, OSPFv2, BGP4, IS-IS route software
BGP.as1(config-router)# neighbor XXX.XXX.YYY.YYY password testtest
% Error while applying TCP-Sig to session(s)
No one to share the patch with the Linux version of quagga, so get to work
option pass
On Mar 21, 2013, at 2:57 PM, Ermal Luçi wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 2:54 PM, Fleuriot Damien wrote:
>
> On Mar 21, 2013, at 9:25 AM, Ermal Luçi wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 1:59 AM, Mark D
> > wrote:
> >
> >> (Hopefully this isn't too out-of-scope for this list..)
> >>
On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 2:54 PM, Fleuriot Damien wrote:
>
> On Mar 21, 2013, at 9:25 AM, Ermal Luçi wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 1:59 AM, Mark D >wrote:
> >
> >> (Hopefully this isn't too out-of-scope for this list..)
> >>
> >> I have an application in mind that I'd like to have accept/
On Mar 21, 2013, at 9:25 AM, Ermal Luçi wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 1:59 AM, Mark D wrote:
>
>> (Hopefully this isn't too out-of-scope for this list..)
>>
>> I have an application in mind that I'd like to have accept/respond to
>> UDP queries sent to perhaps 30K contiguous IP addresses (m
Old Synopsis: patch for bge network driver to enable wake on lan
New Synopsis: [bge] [patch] enable wake on lan
Responsible-Changed-From-To: freebsd-bugs->freebsd-net
Responsible-Changed-By: linimon
Responsible-Changed-When: Thu Mar 21 13:25:19 UTC 2013
Responsible-Changed-Why:
Over to maintainer
Ermal is probably on the right track. Working in a load balanced
environment I've personally done three contiguous /20 blocks using
three loopback interfaces on linux hosts. I'd imagine that FreeBSD
should behave similarly. The only fancy thing the load balancer did
was as packets destined for one
Hi all, I want to know the total of bytes in and out of each IP address
assigned as an alias to an bce0 interlace.
if I run netstat -ib I get something like this:
> netstat -ib
NameMtu Network Address Ipkts Ierrs Idrop
IbytesOpkts Oerrs Obytes Coll
bce0 1500
The following reply was made to PR kern/177139; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: da...@dr.eclipse.co.uk
To: "Vogel Jack" ,
bug-follo...@freebsd.org
Cc:
Subject: Re: kern/177139: [igb] igb drops ethernet ports 2 and 3
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2013 11:02:49 +
--=_839ebb776a4668cec96eeb4f50d4c37a
On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 1:59 AM, Mark D wrote:
> (Hopefully this isn't too out-of-scope for this list..)
>
> I have an application in mind that I'd like to have accept/respond to
> UDP queries sent to perhaps 30K contiguous IP addresses (most likely
> IPV6 addresses because such ranges are easy to
15 matches
Mail list logo
