Ah, I got excited and only left COMPAT_FREEBSD12 in the 13 config and
remove COMPAT_FREEBSD11.
Rudy
% lldb -c routinator.core -- routinator
(lldb) thread backtrace all
* thread #1, name = 'routinator', stop reason = signal SIGSYS
* frame #0: 0x000801a7f50a libc.so.7`fstat at freebsd1
I had added RPKI rules in our FRR config, upgraded to 13.1 and was
confused why we had no routes coming via BGP.
Apparently, routinator took a core dump.
#truss /usr/local/etc/rc.d/routinator onestart
[...snip...]
Starting routinator.
write(1,"Starting routinator.\n",21) = 21 (0x1
On 2/13/20 9:56 PM, Rudy wrote:
Supports t6 as well as t5 cards. Also, is this desired?
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freeb
On 2/14/20 4:21 AM, Andrey V. Elsukov wrote:
On 13.02.2020 06:21, Rudy wrote:
I'm having issues with a box that is acting as a BGP router for my
network. 3 Chelsio cards, two T5 and one T6. It was working great
until I turned up our first port on the T6. It seems like traffic
passing in fro
On 2/14/20 10:00 AM, Olivier Cochard-Labbé wrote:
On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 6:25 PM Rudy wrote:
On 2/12/20 7:21 PM, Rudy wrote:
> I'm having issues with a box that is acting as a BGP router for my
network. 3 Chelsio cards, two T5 and one T6. It was working great
until I turned up our first
LRO will not increase the forwarding rate, but possibly
increase latency. You should keep it disabled.
Cheers,
Vincenzo
Il giorno ven 22 nov 2019 alle ore 22:47 BulkMailForRudy <
cra...@monkeybrains.net> ha scritto:
I just did another test to a machine with a Chelsio card.
Server D (
https://wiki.freebsd.org/10gFreeBSD/Router#Disabling_LRO_and_TSO
Servers A,B, and C are all running services. Server D is acting as a
router. Are the LRO and TSO only for TCP to the box, or will it
increase speeds for forwarding if I enable it?
Thanks,
Rudy
On 11/22/19 1:30 PM, BulkMailForRudy wrot
I have nearly identical setups, but ix0 and ix1 are getting different
options at boot. This seems to be the only difference I see between
machines and I am trying to answer the question, Why can Server A iperf
close to line rate while the other servers can not?
The Test: iperf -P 3 -c REMO
Thanks for the questions, good for me to think about it some more.
Short response:
I don't think it is the FRR config, but the routes received that are
crashing it or ospf6d has some other issue.
On 10/11/19 2:12 PM, Rodney W. Grimes wrote:
I just upgraded from FreeBSD 11 to 12 and upgr
Hot Lava makes some interesting cards using the Intel chipset:
https://www.hotlavasystems.com/products_40gbe.html
You can get a 2x 40Gbps card, configure port1 as 40Gbps, and the second
port as 4x 10Gbps ports with a breakout cable. According to a quick
call to their support number, the 4 p
I've been using Intel for years and they are great; however, I am
building a new router and got all Chelsio cards (recommended on various
tuning posts).
If you just need 2 port copper, get a supermicro board with 10Gbps built
into the motherboard.
Search for "chelsio freebsd tuning" and j
On 2/20/19 1:13 PM, Eugene Grosbein wrote:
21.02.2019 3:37, BulkMailForRudy wrote:
Dear FreeBSD-net,
PPPoE has some broadcast ethernet frames...
I have epair0a on my bridge and epair0b in the jail, but the jail doesn't get
any PADI (PPPoE packets destinged to ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff).
Is
Dear FreeBSD-net,
PPPoE has some broadcast ethernet frames...
I have epair0a on my bridge and epair0b in the jail, but the jail
doesn't get any PADI (PPPoE packets destinged to ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff).
Is there a way to have bridge pass broadcast ethernet frames? (tcpdump
in the jail shows no PAD
13 matches
Mail list logo
