[Bug 208409] [PATCH] igb and ALTQ

2017-04-05 Thread bugzilla-noreply
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=208409 Sean Bruno changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|In Progress

[Bug 217413] panic: Assertion err == 0 failed at /usr/src/sys/net/iflib.c:2242 after 1000baseT physical link shutdown

2017-04-05 Thread bugzilla-noreply
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=217413 Sean Bruno changed: What|Removed |Added Status|In Progress |Closed Resolution|---

[Bug 217748] sys/dev/ixgbe/if_ix.c: PVS-Studio: Assignment to Variable without Use (CWE-563) (1)

2017-04-05 Thread bugzilla-noreply
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=217748 --- Comment #1 from commit-h...@freebsd.org --- A commit references this bug: Author: sbruno Date: Wed Apr 5 22:01:49 UTC 2017 New revision: 316544 URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/316544 Log: Don't overrite vf->flags vari

Re: netmap error on -CURRENT with em and igb

2017-04-05 Thread Sean Bruno
On 02/16/17 02:25, Giuseppe Lettieri wrote: > Hi all, > > the "Operation not permitted" is coming from iflib_netmap_register: > > ifp->if_drv_flags &= ~(IFF_DRV_RUNNING | IFF_DRV_OACTIVE); > ... > IFDI_INIT(ctx);// for igb it calls em_if_init() > ... > return (ifp->if_dr

Re: if_igb(4) VLAN(4) and [RT]XCSUM_IPV6, TSO6

2017-04-05 Thread Sean Bruno
On 03/16/17 12:26, Harry Schmalzbauer wrote: > Hello, > > I'm wondering if I really loose [RT]XCSUM_IPV6 on if_igb(4) vlan(4) > children. > My igb0 (Kawela, aka 82576) options end with > "TSO6,VLAN_HWTSO,RXCSUM_IPV6,TXCSUM_IPV6" > > The vlan(4) filtered interfaces show these: > options=303

Re: Intel 82545 & TSO

2017-04-05 Thread Vijay Singh
This is from FreeBSD 10.3. On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 2:53 PM, Sean Bruno wrote: > > > On 04/05/17 10:26, Vijay Singh wrote: > > I am running FreeBSD as a guest on ESX 5.x and see Intel device 0x100F in > > the guest. The man page for em(4) says: > > > > " The driver supports Transmit/Receive checks

Re: Intel 82545 & TSO

2017-04-05 Thread Sean Bruno
On 04/05/17 10:26, Vijay Singh wrote: > I am running FreeBSD as a guest on ESX 5.x and see Intel device 0x100F in > the guest. The man page for em(4) says: > > " The driver supports Transmit/Receive checksum offload and Jumbo > Frames on all but 82542-based adapters. Furthermore it supports TCP

ngrep/tcpdump and cloned interfaces

2017-04-05 Thread Dave Cottlehuber
hi, I posted this a week ago to freebsd-questions but got nothing. I hope its suitable for asking here. Today I wanted to observe traffic that is proxied via haproxy between IP addresses both bound to a lo1 cloned interface. To my surprise ngrep & tcpdump showed no activity on lo1, but it did sh

Re: [PF] Symmetric routing enforcement, how-to without using "reply-to"...

2017-04-05 Thread Marek Zarychta
On Wed, Apr 05, 2017 at 02:46:06PM +0200, Nils Beyer wrote: > I wrote: > > If I try > > > > ping -S 8.0.0.1 8.8.8.8 > > > > or > > > > ping -S 9.0.0.1 8.8.8.8 > > > > I always see packets only going out on the default gateway's interface. > > sorry, my fault. After issuing a "pfctl -F

Intel 82545 & TSO

2017-04-05 Thread Vijay Singh
I am running FreeBSD as a guest on ESX 5.x and see Intel device 0x100F in the guest. The man page for em(4) says: " The driver supports Transmit/Receive checksum offload and Jumbo Frames on all but 82542-based adapters. Furthermore it supports TCP segmentation offload (TSO) on all adapters but tho

Re: [PF] Symmetric routing enforcement, how-to without using "reply-to"...

2017-04-05 Thread Slawa Olhovchenkov
On Wed, Apr 05, 2017 at 02:46:06PM +0200, Nils Beyer wrote: > I wrote: > > If I try > > > > ping -S 8.0.0.1 8.8.8.8 > > > > or > > > > ping -S 9.0.0.1 8.8.8.8 > > > > I always see packets only going out on the default gateway's interface. > > sorry, my fault. After issuing a "pfctl -F

Re: [PF] Symmetric routing enforcement, how-to without using "reply-to"...

2017-04-05 Thread Nils Beyer
I wrote: > If I try > > ping -S 8.0.0.1 8.8.8.8 > > or > > ping -S 9.0.0.1 8.8.8.8 > > I always see packets only going out on the default gateway's interface. sorry, my fault. After issuing a "pfctl -F all", these ICMP packets are now going through the designated interface. The pr

Re: [PF] Symmetric routing enforcement, how-to without using "reply-to"...

2017-04-05 Thread Nils Beyer
Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote: > I.e. you can't build rules based on "replays", only on "origins", > source IP address generated packes (as you ipfw fwd rules). okay, let's ditch the word "reply". I meant it so that these packets are generated by a software due to incoming packets. If I try p

Re: [PF] Symmetric routing enforcement, how-to without using "reply-to"...

2017-04-05 Thread Slawa Olhovchenkov
On Wed, Apr 05, 2017 at 01:20:57PM +0200, Nils Beyer wrote: > Hi, > > we have two internet lines here. > > Following situation (IP addresses changed) on my server: > > iface "wan1" = 8.0.0.1/24 - GW1 8.0.0.254 (internet line 1) > iface "wan2" = 9.0.0.1/24 - GW2 9.0.0.254 (internet l

[PF] Symmetric routing enforcement, how-to without using "reply-to"...

2017-04-05 Thread Nils Beyer
Hi, we have two internet lines here. Following situation (IP addresses changed) on my server: iface "wan1" = 8.0.0.1/24 - GW1 8.0.0.254 (internet line 1) iface "wan2" = 9.0.0.1/24 - GW2 9.0.0.254 (internet line 2) Now I'd like it so that every packet that comes in on interface "

Re: [Bug 218270] panic: sbsndptr: sockbuf (...) and mbuf (...) clashing

2017-04-05 Thread Daniel Bilik
On Sun, 02 Apr 2017 14:37:54 + bugzilla-nore...@freebsd.org wrote: > https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218270 > Martin Wilke changed: >What|Removed |Added > >