> On Oct 4, 2018, at 11:52 AM, Cy Schubert wrote:
>
> I have rl, fxp, xl, dc, bge (which I have an uncommitted patch for), nfe, and
> sk. Not all are scheduled for removal but this is my inventory for which I
> can test and am willing to help out with. Add iwn and ath too.
I also have a stack
On Mon, 11 Jul 2011, Doug Barton wrote:
On 07/11/2011 21:09, Charles Sprickman wrote:
I've had it hammered into my brain over the years that for servers it's
always best to set link speed and duplex manually at both ends to remove
any possible issues with link negotiation.
That h
On Mon, 11 Jul 2011, David Christensen wrote:
I'm running 8.1 and at least on the bce hosts, it looks like flow
control
isn't supported, it was added on 4/30/2010:
http://svnweb.freebsd.org/base/head/sys/dev/bce/if_bce.c?r1=206268&r2=20
7411
In my 8.1 sources I still see this comment, which wa
On Fri, 8 Jul 2011, David Christensen wrote:
I was able to reproduce the drops in very large numbers on the internal
network today. I simply scp'd some large files from 1000/FD hosts to a
100/FD host (ie: scp bigfile.tgz oldhost.i:/dev/null). Immediately the
1000/FD hosts sending the files sho
On Thu, 7 Jul 2011, YongHyeon PYUN wrote:
On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 02:00:26AM -0400, Charles Sprickman wrote:
More inline, including a bigger picture of what I'm seeing on some other
hosts, but I wanted to thank everyone for all the fascinating ethernet BER
info and the final explanati
yeon PYUN wrote:
On Mon, Jul 04, 2011 at 09:32:11PM -0400, Charles Sprickman wrote:
Hello,
We're running a few 8.1-R servers with Broadcom bce interfaces (Dell R510)
and I'm seeing occasional packet loss on them (enough that it trips nagios
now and then). Cabling seems fine as neither
Just adding a bit more information inline:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2011, Charles Sprickman wrote:
Hello,
We're running a few 8.1-R servers with Broadcom bce interfaces (Dell R510)
and I'm seeing occasional packet loss on them (enough that it trips nagios
now and then). Cabling seems fine
Hello,
We're running a few 8.1-R servers with Broadcom bce interfaces (Dell R510)
and I'm seeing occasional packet loss on them (enough that it trips nagios
now and then). Cabling seems fine as neither the switch nor the sysctl
info for the device show any errors/collisions/etc, however there
Hiroki Sato wrote:
> Charles Sprickman wrote
> in <4df9970d.5000...@bway.net>:
>
> sp> -Edit rc.conf to include your IPv6 IP(s) and default route, specify
> sp> which interfaces will run IPv6, and enable IPv6:
> sp>
> sp> ipv6_enable="YES&qu
though,
but info on the guts of address resolution was hard to come by.
It would be really great if the network_ipv6 script would toggle the
link-local sysctl when run. Why it does not puzzles me.
Thanks,
Charles
Charles Sprickman wrote:
> (sending to list, accidentally missed "reply t
(sending to list, accidentally missed "reply to all" when I replied to Doug)
Doug Barton wrote:
> On 6/12/2011 3:30 PM, Charles Sprickman wrote:
>> Can anyone help me understand what the relationship is between address
>> resolution for the router
>
> I don&#
Hello,
I've been trying to wrap my head around the differences between address
resolution in IPv6 and IPv4 and I'm a bit confused by a real-world issue
I'm seeing in a colo facility where we have dual-stack connectivity.
Basically, what I see is summed up in this recent post:
http://freebsd.
On Tue, 17 May 2011, Hiroki Sato wrote:
Charles Sprickman wrote
in :
sp> First, the easy one. For IPv6 aliases, what is the proper subnet?
Normally it is a /64. See also Section 2.5.4 in RFC 4291.
My understanding was that a /64 was a common subnet since it's the minimum
size
Hello,
I'm having trouble finding the canonical answer on two uses of
interface aliases.
First, the easy one. For IPv6 aliases, what is the proper subnet? I've
found some old info on the WIDE site stating that it should be the same as
the main interface (ie: if I've got a /48, my alias sho
Following up on my own post...
Well, that was dumb. I had IPMI enabled, and it had the same IP I was
trying to use for the alias. Had no idea it somehow created it's own MAC
though, that's odd.
Sorry for the noise.
Charles
On Mon, 16 Aug 2010, Charles Sprickman wrote:
Hello,
Hello,
I've run into an odd problem on an 8.1 amd64 box (still running GENERIC)
with aliases on the em interface.
Config is very simple:
em0: flags=8843 metric 0 mtu 1500
options=9b
ether 00:14:22:b1:54:18
inet 10.3.2.233 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 10.3.2.255
On Wed, 21 Apr 2010, Charles Sprickman wrote:
Hello,
I still need to gather more info when I visit the datacenter to reboot one of
the problematic hosts, but I wanted to verify my basic carp config here was
solid.
Said machine has been booted and is also on a remote power switch now.
This
Hello,
I still need to gather more info when I visit the datacenter to reboot one
of the problematic hosts, but I wanted to verify my basic carp config here
was solid.
I have two hosts that are running a recursing name server on our internal
network for other servers. Since failover from mu
On Sat, 10 Sep 2005, Julian H. Stacey wrote:
-Are there any tunables at either end (both hosts are FreeBSD 4.11 p11) to
alter how fragmented packets are re-assembled?
/usr/ports/net/tcpmssd
An MTU adapter. Apparently not needed on FreeBSD-5 but I mean to
install it on my FreeBSD-4 DSL gateway
agmented?
-Are there any tunables at either end (both hosts are FreeBSD 4.11 p11) to
alter how fragmented packets are re-assembled?
Thanks,
Charles
___
Charles Sprickman
NetEng/SysAdmin
Bway.net - New York's Best Internet - www.bway.net
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - 212.655.9344
On Wed, 9 Mar 2005, Mark Tinguely wrote:
For related curiousities, would you tell me if the FreeBSD a Uniprocessor
or multiprocessor?
Let me give you some details:
FreeBSD 4.10 p5, single Cyrix 250MHz cpu, and the nic is a Netgear
identified as so:
sis0: port 0xee00-0xeeff mem
0xfebff000-0xfebf
box is at 3.3, which may prove
important since it's quite dated.
If there's anything else I can provide, let me know.
Thanks,
Charles
On Mon, 7 Mar 2005, Daniel Hartmeier wrote:
On Mon, Mar 07, 2005 at 02:04:01PM -0500, Charles Sprickman wrote:
Very interesting, thank you for that read
On Mon, 7 Mar 2005, Daniel Hartmeier wrote:
On Sun, Mar 06, 2005 at 04:45:30PM -0500, Charles Sprickman wrote:
For fun I'm going to post a full tcpdump of an ftp session from one box to
the other, maybe someone can spot something there? It's attached and
bzip'd. It's a t
On Fri, 4 Mar 2005, Bill Vermillion wrote:
"Ang utong ko ay sasabog sa sarap!" exclaimed Charles Sprickman
while reading this message on Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 18:43
and then responded with:
On Fri, 4 Mar 2005, Darcy Buskermolen wrote:
On Friday 04 March 2005 14:34, Charles Sprickman wr
On Fri, 4 Mar 2005, Darcy Buskermolen wrote:
On Friday 04 March 2005 14:34, Charles Sprickman wrote:
Howdy,
Sorry to bring what seems like a simple issue up here. I had been blaming
slow afp filesharing between my OS-X (10.3.8 and previous) and FreeBSD 4.x
boxes on netatalk's afp implement
Howdy,
Sorry to bring what seems like a simple issue up here. I had been blaming
slow afp filesharing between my OS-X (10.3.8 and previous) and FreeBSD 4.x
boxes on netatalk's afp implementation for some time. Not too long ago I
got frustrated with this and tried smb and then ftp. On a simple
On Wed, 16 Jul 2003, Hideki ONO wrote:
> Try my patch which I posted to freebsd-bugs last month.
>
> http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-bugs/2003-June/001407.html
How about attaching that to one of the PRs open on this bug? Maybe
someone will commit it then...
Charles
> > I have a prob
27 matches
Mail list logo
