> On May 18, 2014, at 0:12, Julian Elischer wrote:
>> 2) Table type/name can be specified explicitly via one of the following
>> commands:
>> * ipfw table 1 create [type ] [name "table_name"]
> type "ports" would be nice but tricky to do right.
That . . . would be a great addition and have m
On 5/17/14, 9:44 PM, Alexander V. Chernikov wrote:
On 13.05.2014 16:05, Dennis Yusupoff wrote:
I think that universal table for all kind of data (ipv4, ipv6, ports,
etc) is a bad idea by design. At least unless you haven't any
ability to
It is not always "universal" in kernel.
Actually, differ
On 5/18/14, 7:32 AM, Michael Sierchio wrote:
On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 4:30 PM, Ronald F. Guilmette
wrote:
May 16 23:05:33 segfault kernel: arp: 69.62.255.254 moved from
00:1e:13:22:eb:51 to 00:00:0e:07:ac:00 on rl0
May 16 23:05:33 segfault kernel: arp: 69.62.255.254 moved from
00:00:0e:07:ac
On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 04:17:12PM -0700, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
>
> Forgive me, please for such a rudimentary sort of question. I've
> been doing IP networking for more than 15 years, but I never really
> plumbed the depths, and thus I only know the basics.
>
> Quite simply, I'd like to kno
Michael Sierchio kudzu at tenebras.com wrote:
>On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 4:17 PM, Ronald F. Guilmette
> wrote:
>
>> Quite simply, I'd like to know if the defaultrouter= IPv4 address
>> specified in my /etc/rc.conf file should be the same as whatever
>> I normally see as the first hop in an outgoing
Em 17/05/14 20:28, Marcelo Gondim escreveu:
Em 17/05/14 10:44, Alexander V. Chernikov escreveu:
On 13.05.2014 16:05, Dennis Yusupoff wrote:
I think that universal table for all kind of data (ipv4, ipv6, ports,
etc) is a bad idea by design. At least unless you haven't any
ability to
It is not
On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 4:30 PM, Ronald F. Guilmette
wrote:
> May 16 23:05:33 segfault kernel: arp: 69.62.255.254 moved from
00:1e:13:22:eb:51 to 00:00:0e:07:ac:00 on rl0
> May 16 23:05:33 segfault kernel: arp: 69.62.255.254 moved from
00:00:0e:07:ac:00 to 00:1e:13:22:eb:51 on rl0
> May 16 23:25:
As I mentioned in my immediately prior posting here, I have been
having spurious total (100%) connectivity dropouts, quite frequently,
for some several weeks now. I have no idea what might be causing
this, and thus I am exploring everything.
Long long ago (i.e. several years ago now), I was tol
On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 4:17 PM, Ronald F. Guilmette
wrote:
> Quite simply, I'd like to know if the defaultrouter= IPv4 address
> specified in my /etc/rc.conf file should be the same as whatever
> I normally see as the first hop in an outgoing traceroute.
Maybe... see comments below.
> defaultr
Em 17/05/14 10:44, Alexander V. Chernikov escreveu:
On 13.05.2014 16:05, Dennis Yusupoff wrote:
I think that universal table for all kind of data (ipv4, ipv6, ports,
etc) is a bad idea by design. At least unless you haven't any ability to
It is not always "universal" in kernel.
Actually, differ
Forgive me, please for such a rudimentary sort of question. I've
been doing IP networking for more than 15 years, but I never really
plumbed the depths, and thus I only know the basics.
Quite simply, I'd like to know if the defaultrouter= IPv4 address
specified in my /etc/rc.conf file should be
On 17.05.2014 23:57, Barney Wolff wrote:
On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 05:44:37PM +0400, Alexander V. Chernikov wrote:
On 13.05.2014 16:05, Dennis Yusupoff wrote:
I think that universal table for all kind of data (ipv4, ipv6, ports,
etc) is a bad idea by design. At least unless you haven't any abilit
On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 05:44:37PM +0400, Alexander V. Chernikov wrote:
> On 13.05.2014 16:05, Dennis Yusupoff wrote:
> > I think that universal table for all kind of data (ipv4, ipv6, ports,
> > etc) is a bad idea by design. At least unless you haven't any ability to
> It is not always "universal"
On 17.05.2014 19:14, Andreas Nilsson wrote:
On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 3:44 PM, Alexander V. Chernikov
mailto:melif...@freebsd.org>> wrote:
On 13.05.2014 16:05, Dennis Yusupoff wrote:
I think that universal table for all kind of data (ipv4, ipv6,
ports,
etc) is a b
On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 3:44 PM, Alexander V. Chernikov <
melif...@freebsd.org> wrote:
> On 13.05.2014 16:05, Dennis Yusupoff wrote:
>
>> I think that universal table for all kind of data (ipv4, ipv6, ports,
>> etc) is a bad idea by design. At least unless you haven't any ability to
>>
> It is not
.. and as a note - it'll all be behind #ifdef RSS.
-a
On 17 May 2014 07:49, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> On 17 May 2014 07:44, Bentkofsky, Michael wrote:
>> Hi Adrian,
>>
>>
>>
>> I haven’t had the chance to look this over carefully yet as we’re at BSDCan.
>> I think I understand what you’re trying
On 17 May 2014 07:44, Bentkofsky, Michael wrote:
> Hi Adrian,
>
>
>
> I haven’t had the chance to look this over carefully yet as we’re at BSDCan.
> I think I understand what you’re trying to achieve by aligning the per-CPU
> timer processing per core. In principal that sounds reasonable, although
Hi Adrian,
I haven't had the chance to look this over carefully yet as we're at BSDCan. I
think I understand what you're trying to achieve by aligning the per-CPU timer
processing per core. In principal that sounds reasonable, although I am unsure
if you were trying to solve a particular perfor
On 13.05.2014 16:05, Dennis Yusupoff wrote:
I think that universal table for all kind of data (ipv4, ipv6, ports,
etc) is a bad idea by design. At least unless you haven't any ability to
It is not always "universal" in kernel.
Actually, different radix tables are used to store both IPv4 and IPv6
19 matches
Mail list logo
