On Tue, Feb 02, 2021 at 09:16:49PM +0100, Lutz Donnerhacke wrote:
> fxp0.lower -- iface0.netgraph.out0 -- link1.bridge.link2 -- upper.fxp0
> \.link3 -- ether.eiface
The strange thing is, that both fxp0 and eiface provide an interface to the
kernel I
On Tue, Feb 02, 2021 at 10:05:15AM -0500, petru garstea wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I need help to unify 2 netgraphs
>
> 1st ng_bridge netgraph
>
> ngctl mkpeer fxp0: bridge lower link0
> ngctl connect fxp0: em0:lower upper link1
> ngctl name fxp0:lower em0Bridge
> ngctl mkpeer fxp0:lower eiface link3 ether
Hi,
I need help to unify 2 netgraphs
1st ng_bridge netgraph
ngctl mkpeer fxp0: bridge lower link0
ngctl connect fxp0: em0:lower upper link1
ngctl name fxp0:lower em0Bridge
ngctl mkpeer fxp0:lower eiface link3 ether
2nd ng_netflow netgraph
mkpeer fxp0: netflowlower iface0
name fxp0:lower n
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=253096
--- Comment #7 from Rodney W. Grimes ---
(In reply to Michael Tuexen from comment #6)
Not that I can find, though I find some stuff on the internet that suggests
Juniper sponsored some work on it, where that ended up I have no idea.
This i
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=238741
Michael Tuexen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[tcp] RACK stack causes |[tcp] Using RACK with CDG
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=238741
--- Comment #2 from Michael Tuexen ---
I can confirm that the combination of CDG and RACK results in a stalled
transfer. I tested this with FreeBSD current.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=253096
--- Comment #6 from Michael Tuexen ---
(In reply to Rodney W. Grimes from comment #5)
Is TCP-AO supported by the base stack?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
