On 07/28/2012 15:50, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
> You can point the people ...
I'm not pointing anyone at anything. I raised the issue here in case
anyone here is interested in following up. Fernando already did.
Doug
--
Change is hard.
___
freebsd
FYI, this conversation is happening in the list below. I have no opinion
regarding whether it is a bug or not, but I thought folks here might be
interested.
Doug
Original Message
Subject: Re: [ipv6hackers] funny FreeBSD bug
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2012 19:26:08 +0200
From: Marc Heuse
On 07/12/2012 01:50 PM, George Neville-Neil wrote:
>
> On Jul 12, 2012, at 14:28 , Doug Barton wrote:
>
>> While y'all are looking at MTU (which is an increasingly important topic
>> as we move into a Gig+ world) I'm wondering what our support is for
>> htt
While y'all are looking at MTU (which is an increasingly important topic
as we move into a Gig+ world) I'm wondering what our support is for
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4821 ?? I asked this a while back and
never got an answer.
This method of PMTUD is really important given the massive (stupid)
On 07/04/2012 06:43, m s wrote:
> I want to config FreeBSD as a dns server.
You don't mention what kind of name server you want, but from the rest
of your post I'm assuming that you want a local resolver. If that's the
case, your best bet is to stick with all of the defaults in the base
currently,
On 07/03/2012 23:29, Alexander V. Chernikov wrote:
> On 04.07.2012 01:29, Doug Barton wrote:
>>>> Just curious ... what's the MTU on your FreeBSD box, and the Linux box?
>
> In this particular setup - 1500. You're probably meaning type of mbufs
> which are allocat
On 07/03/2012 14:44, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 03, 2012 at 02:19:06PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
>> Just curious ... what's the MTU on your FreeBSD box, and the Linux box?
>
> he is (correctly) using min-sized packets, and counting packets not bps.
Yes, I know. That
Just curious ... what's the MTU on your FreeBSD box, and the Linux box?
(also, please don't cross-post to so many lists) :)
Doug
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail
So I guess I'll re-ask the question here: According to
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1122 that RFC has been updated quite a
bit over the last 23 years. Have you followed that chain upwards to make
sure that your concerns are still valid?
Doug
On 3/9/2012 3:26 PM, Alex Yong wrote:
> (Originally
Looping in hrs@ since he's responsible for that area.
On 03/03/2012 02:49, Attila Nagy wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On a recently built stable/9 I have these lines in rc.conf:
> ifconfig_em0_name="admin"
> vlans_admin="pub"
> create_args_pub="vlan 20"
> ifconfig_admin="inet 192.168.2.20 netmask 255.255.255.
Looks like we are making progress here, but are not quite there yet.
Original Message
Subject: IPv6 NIDS evasion and IPv6 fragmentation/reassembly improvements
Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2012 16:57:22 -0300
From: Fernando Gont
Organization: SI6 Networks
To: ipv6-...@lists.cluenet.de
Fo
Does anyone who knows more about this topic want to comment? If we're
making progress in this area it would be nice to publicize it.
Doug
Original Message
Subject: [ipv6hackers] rfc5722 implementation
Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2012 12:50:13 +0100
From: Marc Heuse
Reply-To: IPv6 Hacke
If it's a hurricane electric tunnel don't you want protocol 41?
On 01/31/2012 22:55, Eugene Grosbein wrote:
> 01.02.2012 11:36, Eric W. Bates пишет:
>> Seems like a silly question; but how does one allow the packets
>> composing a gif tunnel thru ipfw?
>>
>> I assumed a gif was made up of ipencap
On 01/03/2012 13:03, Hiroki Sato wrote:
> Okay, thank you for your report. I will take some time to fix
> TCP_MD5SIG support in openbgpd and inform you when another patch is
> ready.
Any news on this? Not trying to be pushy, just wondering if I need to
plan a test/change window.
Thanks,
Dou
Looping in the author of that change ...
On 01/10/2012 02:24, Dennis Koegel wrote:
> Cheers,
>
> problem: Having a *lot* of IPv6 interfaces (Vlan interfaces in this case)
> causes a huge and annoying delay time at system boot in 9.0R.
>
> ipv6_up() in network.subr does this:
>
> + # wait fo
On 01/03/2012 21:23, Nikolay Denev wrote:
> You are setting the keys with setkey for both directions of a single session,
> right?
Yes. But thanks for asking. :)
Doug
--
You can observe a lot just by watching. -- Yogi Berra
Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in
On 01/03/2012 11:06, Hiroki Sato wrote:
> Doug Barton wrote
> in <4f027bc0.1080...@freebsd.org>:
>
> do> We have a pair of physical FreeBSD systems configured as routers
> do> designed to operate in an active/standby CARP configuration. Everything
> do> used t
On 01/03/2012 11:16, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
> I was wondering from *where* you were updating, not to which revision.
D'oh! Sorry ... the previous kernel was from stable/8 about 6 months
ago. Well before Attilio's merge.
Doug
--
You can observe a lot just by watching. -- Yogi Berra
On 01/03/2012 10:03, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
>
> On 3. Jan 2012, at 17:47 , Borja Marcos wrote:
>
>>
>> On Jan 3, 2012, at 4:29 PM, Ed Maste wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks for the link Nikolay.
>>>
>>> Borja, I assume it's the PR submission form that gave you trouble -
>>> sorry for that. Based on your repo
We have a pair of physical FreeBSD systems configured as routers
designed to operate in an active/standby CARP configuration. Everything
used to work fine, but since an upgrade to 8.2-STABLE on December 29th
the two routers don't speak BGP to each other anymore. They both
function fine individually
On 12/13/2011 16:41, Hiroki Sato wrote:
> I do not think it is a good idea that the rtadvd daemon automatically
> splits prefixes shorter than 64 to ones with just 64. "Which prefix
> should be advertised" is one of things which a sysadmin must specify
> explicitly when it receives prefixes sh
On 11/27/2011 7:13 AM, LinuxIsOne wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Well, I am basically a Windows convert, but very frankly saying that: I am
> new to the world of Linux. So I should use FreeBSD or something easier
> distribution in the Linux...? Or it is perfectly okay for a newbie to go
> with FreeBSD?
FreeBSD
On 10/22/2011 06:02, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
> 3. Hand-hack /etc/network.subr to address this, which you will lose
>every time you run mergemaster
I'm not sure why you'd say that. By design mergemaster checks the
$FreeBSD Id string in the installed file and if it's the same as the one
in the t
On 09/05/2011 17:18, Arnaud Lacombe wrote:
> From my point of view, I should be able to run a FreeBSD 9.0 kernel
> (when released) on top of a FreeBSD 5 userland without such issues.
Unfortunately your expectation is completely unrealistic. We do our best
to maintain backward compatibility but som
On 08/22/2011 16:49, John wrote:
> Fellow Net'ers
>
>Debugging an nfs locking problem to a linux host, I accidently
> issued some ifconfig commands on the bsd server (9-current) and
> found that duplicate netmasks seem to work fine. For instance:
>
> bce0: flags=8843 metric 0 mtu 1500
>
On 08/04/2011 22:59, Mattia Rossi wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I've finally patched my 8.2 IPv6 gateway with the RDNSS/DNSSL patches
> and I'm distributing DNS servers that way now. Works fine, my box
> running CURRENT picks up the DNS servers and search domains and writes
> them into /etc/resolv.conf usi
On 07/11/2011 22:47, Charles Sprickman wrote:
> 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 an
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 hasn't been the right thing to do for at least 8 year
On 07/04/2011 21:20, Doug Barton wrote:
On 07/04/2011 20:26, Michael Sinatra wrote:
On 07/04/11 19:59, Doug Barton wrote:
If I try to set up a carp interface for IPv6 on a recent 8.2-STABLE I
get an error using either /64 or /128 as the mask:
ifconfig carp2 vhid 4 advskew 0 pass mycleverpass
On 07/04/2011 20:26, Michael Sinatra wrote:
On 07/04/11 19:59, Doug Barton wrote:
If I try to set up a carp interface for IPv6 on a recent 8.2-STABLE I
get an error using either /64 or /128 as the mask:
ifconfig carp2 vhid 4 advskew 0 pass mycleverpass 2001:a:b:c::2/64
ifconfig 2001:a:b:c::2
If I try to set up a carp interface for IPv6 on a recent 8.2-STABLE I
get an error using either /64 or /128 as the mask:
ifconfig carp2 vhid 4 advskew 0 pass mycleverpass 2001:a:b:c::2/64
ifconfig 2001:a:b:c::2/64: bad value (width too large)
There are no examples for IPv6 in the man page, or
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't know what you mean by "address resolution for the router."
and link-local? Why is this required? Why
can I ping other hosts on the subnet w
On 05/21/2011 01:58, Matthew Bowman wrote:
I have an uplink to my ISP on a 2 IP /30 network (1.1.1.0/30 in the diagram)
No help for your actual problem, sorry. I just wanted to point out that
1/8 has been assigned by IANA to APNIC, so it should not be used as a
substitute for RFC 1918 space.
On 4/19/2011 11:39 AM, Lev Serebryakov wrote:
Hello, Doug.
You wrote 19 апреля 2011 г., 22:01:20:
I'm looking for way to setup IPv6 router config on IPv4-configured
node without reboot.
Your best bet is actually to reboot. There are a lot of moving parts,
and it's difficult to catch them a
On 4/19/2011 10:18 AM, Lev Serebryakov wrote:
Hello, Freebsd-net.
I'm looking for way to setup IPv6 router config on IPv4-configured
node without reboot.
Your best bet is actually to reboot. There are a lot of moving parts,
and it's difficult to catch them all, especially with a gateway s
On 04/08/2011 17:57, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
On Fri, 8 Apr 2011, Doug Barton wrote:
Bjoern,
We're seeing something very similar to the following with pf and IPv6:
similar to what?
We're seeing the "must be migratable" part of the panic, but nothing else.
It would b
Bjoern,
We're seeing something very similar to the following with pf and IPv6:
http://pastebin.com/AJzXmEWe
I notice that you did some locking changes in r216022, could this be
related?
Doug
--
Nothin' ever doesn't change, but nothin' changes much.
-- OK Go
On 3/30/2011 10:06 AM, Arnaud Lacombe wrote:
No. We are taking about exceptional recoverable situation not handled
by the software, it should not bring the complete system down. If
you're swapping code has defect, you do not tell one to buy more RAM
not to trigger the defective code, you fix the
On 3/30/2011 7:19 AM, Arnaud Lacombe wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 1:11 AM, Doug Barton wrote:
The only things I've been able to get from Jack is "We, at Intel, test
em(4) at 256k nmbclusters. We do not have problem. If you have
problem, raise nmbcluster.". 256k n
On 03/29/2011 22:07, Arnaud Lacombe wrote:
... or maintain internal changes to the driver to make it not that memory
hungry/behave well under memory pressure, especially on system where memory_is_
a constraint.
If you come up with patches, I'm sure everyone would like to see them.
Meanwhile
It would probably be useful to document those tunables in the man page.
It already has good sections for other tunables, so adding them should
be easy.
Doug
On 03/29/2011 14:55, Jack Vogel wrote:
Our validation group has a default postinstall process, every installed
system gets those chang
http://blogmal.42.org/tidbits/tcp-bug.story
$someone really needs to take a look at this. :)
Doug
--
Nothin' ever doesn't change, but nothin' changes much.
-- OK Go
Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS.
Yours for the righ
http://blogmal.42.org/tidbits/tcp-bug.story
$someone really needs to take a look at this. :)
Doug
--
Nothin' ever doesn't change, but nothin' changes much.
-- OK Go
Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS.
Yours for the righ
On 03/04/2011 16:21, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
That said I messed with the patch to avoid the two copies of the
algorithms (so it will not be 4 soon). I know it compiles but I have
yet to test it. I'd love to hear opinions. The #ifdef INET6/INETs
are ugly but we'll see those a lot more and need to
On 03/04/2011 16:21, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
On Sun, 27 Feb 2011, Doug Barton wrote:
As for default algorithm, is there any reason not to make it 4?
Yes, it's expensive both computation time and stack wise. Last I put
MD5ctxs on the stack I was told that it was previously avoided do to
On 02/27/2011 14:05, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
On Sun, 27 Feb 2011, Fernando Gont wrote:
Hi,
On 27/02/2011 05:38 p.m., Doug Barton wrote:
Has this been commited to the tree, already? -- If so, what's the
default algorithm?
Bjoern was planning to do it, I'm going to do it if he d
On 02/27/2011 12:23, Fernando Gont wrote:
On 08/02/2011 03:47 p.m., Doug Barton wrote:
[catching up with e-mail]
I've been up and running on this patch vs. r218391 for over 24 hours
now, using algorithm 4 (as someone said is now the default in Linux)
without any problems.
I think Bjoe
On 2/17/2011 9:59 AM, Steven Hartland wrote:
- Original Message - From: "John Baldwin"
Waiting for the default route to be pingable actually fixed a few
other problems for us on 7 though as well (often ntpdate would not
work on boot and now it works reliably, etc.) so we went with that
Sat, Jan 29, 2011 at 4:27 AM, Doug Barton wrote:
On 01/28/2011 11:57, Ivo Vachkov wrote:
On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 9:00 PM, Doug Bartonwrote:
How does net.inet.ip.portrange.randomalg sound? I would also suggest that
the second sysctl be named net.inet.ip.portrange.randomalg.alg5_tr
On 01/28/2011 11:57, Ivo Vachkov wrote:
On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 9:00 PM, Doug Barton wrote:
How does net.inet.ip.portrange.randomalg sound? I would also suggest that
the second sysctl be named net.inet.ip.portrange.randomalg.alg5_tradeoff so
that one could do 's
On 01/28/2011 06:33, Ivo Vachkov wrote:
Hello,
I would like to thank for the help and for the recommendations.
I attach second version of the patch, I proposed earlier, including
following changes:
1) All RFC6056 algorithms are implemented.
2) Both IPv4 and IPv6 stacks are modified to use the
On 01/07/2011 18:01, Boris Kochergin wrote:
- snprintf(hbuf, sizeof(hbuf), "%x:%x:%x:%x:%x:%x",
There are numerous examples of this string in the tree. Some of them
seem like they may be correct, but many of them are obviously printing
out mac addresses and should be converted, one way or an
On 01/07/2011 14:35, Ivan Voras wrote:
On 01/04/11 15:56, J. Hellenthal wrote:
On 01/04/2011 04:46, Mickey Harvey wrote:
I would like to know where I can find the source code for the TCP
implementation so I can do some hacking on it.
Have you looked through the repository at all ?
http://svn
[ Pardon the cross-post, feel free to follow up to just one list, I'm on
both. ]
Running a system on the latest 8-stable as a router we are seeing the
following panic: http://pastebin.com/AJzXmEWe
Kernel is as follows:
include GENERIC
ident ROUTER
options SW_WATCHDO
While hacking dhclient-script gets you '1337 points, it's generally a
better idea to use dhclient.conf to accomplish the same goals whenever
possible. It's also a really bad idea to chflags /etc/resolv.conf (note,
it's resolv.conf, not resolve.conf) because that can cause
dhclient-script to loo
On 11/10/2010 14:42, gu...@bsdmail.org wrote:
I'm running freebsd 7.2 and trying to find a way to forward a packet
based on it's source address. The following command works fine for
ipv4 addresses but fails for ipv6 addresses. ipfw add 101 fwd
nextaddr ip from myaddr to any out This works fine i
On 10/14/2010 2:43 AM, Eugene Grosbein wrote:
Is host(1) supposed to do lookups using suffixes from /etc/resolv.conf
for FQDN with dot at the end?
... if only there were a document of some kind that described how the
tool was supposed to work ... something like a manual ...
:)
Doug
--
Br
On 10/13/2010 12:05 AM, Eugene Grosbein wrote:
On 13.10.2010 01:39, Doug Barton wrote:
I care about my resolver behavior.
Ok, well, that's working as advertised, so no problems then.
That's fine. And how about host(1)?
It looks for MX record for synthetic domain names
using suf
On 10/12/2010 5:34 AM, Eugene Grosbein wrote:
On 12.10.2010 14:10, Doug Barton wrote:
It's a pity if we have no diagnostic utility that behaves just like
ordinary applications like MTA dealing with DNS... How am I supposed
to debug suspected MTA behavior without such utility?
Step 1, v
On 10/11/2010 8:32 PM, Eugene Grosbein wrote:
On 11.10.2010 18:05, Hajimu UMEMOTO wrote:
egrosbein> Is it a bug in our resolver?
I think no, host(1) links ISC's resolver, and it doesn't use libc's
resolver. I suspect there is some problem in host(1) or ISC's
resolver.
Is there a command ca
erested in learning.
On 9/30/2010 4:38 PM, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
On Thu, 30 Sep 2010, Doug Barton wrote:
Hey,
In any case I didn't say that 6rd was not useful at all. What I tried
to make the case for is that its utility is limited, both in the
absolute sense and in the temporal sense; and
On 9/30/2010 2:46 PM, Rui Paulo wrote:
I really don't feel like discussion this ad nauseum as your last IPv6
thread, but 6rd is useful and your argument about the timeline for
FreeBSD 9.0 doesn't make sense: we can have this on FreeBSD 8-STABLE
in a week after this is committed to HEAD.
Well I
On 9/30/2010 12:13 PM, Rui Paulo wrote:
On 28 Sep 2010, at 23:27, Doug Barton wrote:
On 9/22/2010 1:32 PM, Hiroki Sato wrote:
| Hello,
|
| Can anyone try a patch for adding 6rd (RFC 5569) support to stf(4)?
Well I don't want to be "Mr. Negativity," but I'd like to sugg
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 9/22/2010 1:32 PM, Hiroki Sato wrote:
| Hello,
|
| Can anyone try a patch for adding 6rd (RFC 5569) support to stf(4)?
Well I don't want to be "Mr. Negativity," but I'd like to suggest that
adding this support is the wrong way to go. STF and t
On 8/28/2010 3:08 PM, Bernd Walter wrote:
Only the PCI and loopback interface responds to their own link local
address.
I'm also puzzled about what I need to configure on an interface
to get an link-local address.
I've finally put ifconfig_ue0/1="UP" into rc.conf.
You haven't said what version
On Mon, 9 Aug 2010, Vladislav V. Prodan wrote:
09.08.2010 3:51, Doug Barton пишет:
If you are trying to do something else, let us know and we'll try to
help you with it. :)
First, remove the output "Invalid argument"
And instead of an error ";; connection timed out;
On Sun, 8 Aug 2010, Vladislav V. Prodan wrote:
# host -6 2001:5c0:1000:b::599b 8.8.8.8
I think that there has been some fuzzy thinking on this thread. :)
There is no way that the command above could possibly work. The -6
option to host means "use IPv6 transport to make this request." The
sp
Someone at work has been reading
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-6man-text-addr-representation :)
This change follows the rules in that draft which will become and RFC as
soon as it finishes winding its way through the process, so I am
supportive of the change you are proposing.
Doug
On 5
Seems reasonable to me.
Doug
On 05/03/10 12:27, John Baldwin wrote:
> While testing some changes with vlans and the new vlan_ syntax in rc.conf
> I've noticed the following behavior:
>
> ifconfig foo0.100 destroy
>
> Will actually try to kldload the 'foo' driver. This can prove very no
On 04/23/10 11:54, Thomas Donnelly wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have a few servers on a vlan which have all happily auto configured
> via RA, both FreeBSD and CentOS boxes. However, I freshly installed a
> FreeBSD 7 box, brought it to stable, and it wont auto configure.
What are the versions of the FreeBSD
Sorry it's taken me so long to get back to this, had a lot of other
pressing issues. Short version, I think you're taking the wrong approach
here.
Longer version, I'm going to be posting to -current shortly to ask for
opinions on what the defaults should be. My understanding from the last
go-round
On 03/13/10 04:25, Earl Lapus wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I was browsing through the ping6 code and I noticed that one
> particular call to getaddrinfo() didn't have a freeaddrinfo() pair.
> All calls to getaddrinfo() should have an equivalent freeaddrinfo(), right?
>
> Attached is a patch that "tries-to-re
On 3/8/2010 5:43 AM, jhell wrote:
On Sun, 7 Mar 2010 21:26, dougb@ wrote:
Oops, missed one.
Doug
;) Hi Doug& everyone,
Personally I think that ipv6_enable could be skipped(removed) all-in-all.
Here is my reason:
It seems needless to have if, the value of ipv6_network_interfaces could
j
Oops, missed one.
Doug
--
... and that's just a little bit of history repeating.
-- Propellerheads
Improve the effectiveness of your Internet presence with
a domain name makeover!http://SupersetSolutions.com/
Index: network.subr
As we've previously discussed, I would like to un-obsolete ipv6_enable,
and return it to the status of being the knob that actually controls
whether or not we configure IPv6. My understanding is that the consensus
is in agreement with this change, however I'm posting my proposed patch
(minus the rc
On 02/24/10 14:17, Li, Qing wrote:
> Please try this patch
>
> http://people.freebsd.org/~qingli/nd6.c.diff
>
> and let me know if it works out for you.
Ok, been up for way more than 24 hours now, I would say that this bug is
fixed. :) Thanks again for your quick reply.
Doug
--
On 02/25/10 19:56, Steve Bertrand wrote:
> Do you want more v6 traffic thrown at the interface for testing?
Thanks for the offer, but the load I have on it now is the same as what
I had when I got the crashes, so I think it will either work, or it will
not work. :)
19+ hours and counting
D
On 02/24/10 14:17, Li, Qing wrote:
> Please try this patch
>
> http://people.freebsd.org/~qingli/nd6.c.diff
>
> and let me know if it works out for you.
>
> Thanks,
>
> -- Qing
Thank YOU. :) Uptime is 12 hours so far, with fairly continuous (albeit
light) IPv6 traffic and so far so good.
Howdy,
I've had the following crash twice now when leaving my system up overnight:
(kgdb) #0 doadump () at pcpu.h:246
#1 0xc05f64af in boot (howto=260)
at /usr/local/src/sys/kern/kern_shutdown.c:416
#2 0xc05f6792 in panic (fmt=Variable "fmt" is not available.
) at /usr/local/src/sys/kern/k
On Tue, 12 Jan 2010, Brett Lee wrote:
Hello,
Using FreeBSD 8.0-RELEASE, and am trying variations in /etc/rc.conf in an
attempt to enable IPv6 on ONLY one of the systems two interfaces.
Specifically, em0 should be enabled IPv4 DHCP, and bge0 should be enabled
IPv6 only.
From the KAME link
Richard A Steenbergen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I just noticed, while trying to do a little debugging, that ping6
> doesn't seem to have a way to specify "do not fragment" like ping does
> for IPv4. Obviously the way this is implemented has been changed, since
> there is no longer a DF-bit in IPv6, but it
Juergen Lock wrote:
> The problem with bridging and wifi is that on wifi you usually can
> use only a single mac address...
Ok, I'm not heartbroken if it won't work, but it would be nice if the
wiki were updated so that no one else wastes time on it like I did
last night.
Doug
--
Imp
Hajimu UMEMOTO wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The ipfw and ip6fw were unified into ipfw2, now. But, we still have
> rc.firewall and rc.firewall6. However, there are conflicts with each
> other, and it confuses the users, IMHO.
> So, I made a patch to unify rc.firewall and rc.firewall6, and obsolete
> rc.firew
Leonardo Reginin wrote:
> Hello fellows.
>
> I have a FreeBSD 5.1 ( it's old, I know )
It's well past old. You're unlikely to get any help on this since 5.x
is EOL and 5.1 isn't even close to the latest release on that branch.
I would be happy to be proven wrong though.
Doug
--
Impro
Lawrence Stewart wrote:
> Doug Barton wrote:
>> I cc'ed those who seem to have put the most/recent effort into
>> sys/dev/wpi.
>>
>> Is there any objection to turning off WPI_DEBUG by default? it creates
>> a lot of spam that the average user doesn't need
I cc'ed those who seem to have put the most/recent effort into
sys/dev/wpi.
Is there any objection to turning off WPI_DEBUG by default? it creates
a lot of spam that the average user doesn't need. I use my 3945abg
every day and haven't had any problems with it for ages so I think
it's safe to say
I'm adding Brooks to the cc list since he is mr. dhcp lately. :)
David Horn wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 1:31 AM, Doug Barton wrote:
>> David Horn wrote:
>>> Without seeing the actual tcpdump of the dhcp packets, I would guess
>>> that this is the Classle
David Horn wrote:
> Without seeing the actual tcpdump of the dhcp packets, I would guess
> that this is the Classless Static Route option in DHCPv4 (option 121).
Ok, I will give the tcpdump option a go as soon as I have a chance.
Meanwhile, if this is in fact the case how would we make it work in
vol...@vwsoft.com wrote:
> On 09/13/09 06:27, Eugene Grosbein wrote:
>> Hi!
>>
>> For 8.0-BETA3:
>>
>> % host -l grosbein.pp.ru. ns2.rucable.net.
>> ; Transfer failed.
>> /usr/local/src/lib/bind/isc/../../../contrib/bind9/lib/isc/unix/socket.c:2486:
>> REQUIREsock) != ((void *)0)) && (((const i
security wrote:
> ATT uses PPPoE on their modems. Did your router have any special PPPoE
> settings?
It's a two-piece thing, "their" modem and my wireless router. The
wireless router and windows know what to do with the info they are
handed from the modem, FreeBSD doesn't.
Sorry if I wasn't clea
Michael K. Smith - Adhost wrote:
>> -Original Message-
>> From: owner-freebsd-...@freebsd.org [mailto:owner-freebsd-
>> n...@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of Julian Elischer
>> Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 4:00 PM
>> To: Doug Barton
>> Cc: freebsd-net@fr
Howdy,
I usually have a wireless router connected directly to the AT&T/Yahoo
DSL modem but last night I wanted to do some debugging so I plugged my
laptop directly into the modem (after powering off the modem, etc.).
The values I got back from DHCP not only don't make sense, they didn't
work in F
Mikolaj Golub wrote:
> BTW, we have already had the pr about this problem.
>
> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=bin/138061
>
> IMO it would be nice to add the patch there.
Normally that would be a good idea, but I've just adopted the PR and
sent a link to it and the patch to the bind-u
Vladislav V. Prodan wrote:
> FreeBSD 8.0-BETA4 amd64
>
> # whois -6 2a01:d0::1
> whois: connect(): Connection refused
>
> In man whois written:
> -6 Use the IPv6 Resource Center (6bone) database. It contains
> net-
> work names and addresses for the IPv6 network.
>
>
> T
Matthias Apitz wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am wondering what could cause the following WLAN performance diff
> between a XP and 8-CURRENT laptop, sitting side by side and connected to
> the same AP:
>
> OS XP 8-CURRENT
> NIC Intel 3945ABGAtheros 5424/2424
> Ping
David Horn wrote:
> Please close this bug (conf/132179) as fixed. SVN r195029
Cool, I fixed a PR without even knowing it. :) Thanks for letting us
know it's fixed, and sorry I missed the PR first time around.
Doug
--
This .signature sanitized for your protection
___
Frank Behrens wrote:
> Edwin Groothuis wrote on 5 Jun 2009 22:44:
>> After pondering at conf/58595, I came with this text.
>>
>> The ntpd is not enabled by default, so the fact that the servers
>> are commented out should not be an issue.
>> ...
>> +# server pool.ntp.org
>> +# server pool.ntp.org
Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
> If that's your thread, it is. Updating to latest HEAD should have the
> fix. It would be great if you could confirm that everything is
> working again with just a plain HEAD.
I can confirm that with latest HEAD it's back to normal for me with my
wpi+wlan.
Thanks!
Doug
David Horn wrote:
> Proposal: Rework ipv6 rtsol initialization in rc.d
> Why: on multihomed or transient (e.g. laptops) connections, ipv6
> autoconfiguration can be slow, causing ipv6 initialization delays
> while waiting for unsolicited router advertisements
I don't quite understand this prob
Lev Serebryakov wrote:
> Hello, Freebsd-stable.
>
> BIND on my new router (7.1-STABLE, BIND 9.4.3-P1) shows bunch of
> errors on every start and doesn't answer on requests for 30-60 seconds
> after that. Errors are like this:
It's not necessary or desirable to paste in so many examples of the
s
1 - 100 of 175 matches
Mail list logo
