"Thomas Mueller" wrote:
>Is it possible to build and install FreeBSD so as to be bootable and access
>the internet with an Ethernet card that doesn't work in FreeBSD?
You're question doesn't make a lot of sense on the face of it.
Why on earth would you either WANT or NEED to install FreeBSD on
In message
Andreas Nilsson wrote:
>> That is *not* what the Handbook says. Please read it.
>> https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/firewalls-ipfw.html
>>
>Ok, so the handbook is wrong. It's a bug in the documentation.
ACK
>As soon as set firewall_script instead of firewa
In message <74b7ccf0-967f-40b1-9818-3417cd8d1...@punkt.de>,
"Patrick M. Hausen" wrote:
>https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6761
Wow. Thanks for that. Quite certainly, 6.3 (part 1) is confirming
that this is the way things are now, and have been, apparently since
2013.
I really didn't know. Now
In message <201906190617.x5j6hqma016...@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net>,
Rodney W. Grimes" wrote:
>> In message <201906181719.x5ihj8g0014...@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net>,
>> "Rodney W. Grimes" wrote:
>>
>> >What is in /etc/host.conf, /etc/resolv.conf, do you have DNS running?
>>
>>
>> 1) https://pastebin.com/raw
In message
Andreas Nilsson wrote:
>But why are you even running rc.firewall if it does not do what you want?
You are asking me the very question that *I* have been asking myself
since my "upgrade" to 12.0.
Why is /etc/rc.firewall even being executed? I never explicitly asked for
that, but th
In message <201906181719.x5ihj8g0014...@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net>,
"Rodney W. Grimes" wrote:
>What is in /etc/host.conf, /etc/resolv.conf, do you have DNS running?
1) https://pastebin.com/raw/wXTTgd9R
2) https://pastebin.com/raw/PiGpN0LU
3) Yes, local-unbound
In message
Freddie Cash wrote:
>For someone who doesn't want to be preached to about the benefits of IPv6,
>you certainly do a lot of preaching about not wanting IPv6. :)
Guilty as charged.
>You've been given the tools to do exactly what you want:
> - comment out IPv6 support in the kernel c
In message
Andreas Nilsson wrote:
>I have no ipv6 rules in ipfw when configuring rc.conf as:
>
>firewall_enable="YES"
>firewall_script="/etc/ipfw.rules".
I don't know what to say, other than that this was not my experience.
When I first noiced that /etc/rc.firewall was injecting rules into ipf
In message <23816.53518.998090.665...@jerusalem.litteratus.org>,
Robert Huff wrote:
>> Actually, no, that's not how one is supposed to enable one's own set
>> of ipfw ules. To do that, the Handbook (Sec. 30.4.1) says very clearly
>> that one should do:
>>
>> firewall_enable="YES"
>>
In message <20190618082951.ga84...@straasha.imrryr.org>,
Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
>Agreed. I find it takes very little effort to not have IPv6 get
>in my way, and with that taken care of, it is then occasionally
>even useful. If this thread boils down to annoyance about localhost
>resolving to b
In message <9af5df39-9b81-4270-b25c-d089c971e...@punkt.de>,
"Patrick M. Hausen" wrote:
> Am 18.06.2019 um 09:44 schrieb Ronald F. Guilmette :
>> As I have already learned, the /etc/rc.firewall script also assumes both the
>> presence of, and the desirability o
In message ,
Eugene Grosbein wrote:
>18.06.2019 10:10, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
>
>> How can I turn off IPv6 entirely without rebuilding the kernel?
>
>You cannot. GENERIC kernel specifically enables IPv6 support and you need to
>disable it at compile time.
>And if yo
I do not wish to begin any religious war here. I understand that IPv6
can be a sensitive and sometimes even emotional issue for many people.
Speaking only for myself, and only for the present moment, I can say
that for me, IPv6 represents only an annoyance and a very sizable
distraction. At prese
In message <20190618003925.a49a1156e...@mail.bitblocks.com>,
Bakul Shah wrote:
>> I really would like to understand why manual edits to /etc/hosts seem
>> to have no effect whatosoever.
That's issue/question #1.
>> And more importantly, I'd really still
>> like to know whey X applications can
In message
,
Adam wrote:
>On Sat, Jun 15, 2019 at 12:54 AM Ronald F. Guilmette
>wrote:
>> ... except for the browsers, and also one other thing (nmh outbound
>> email handling). Now, both Firefox and Opera crash and burn, right
>> out of the gate, when started from th
I've recently completed a long overdue upgrade from FreeBSD 9.1 to
12.0. And when I say "completed" that isn't 100% accurate, as there
are still a couple of remaining things I can't quite seem to make
work properly.
Both of these, perhaps coincidentally, have to do with the magic
name "localhost"
Sorry. I really should go off and RTFM on this, but I'm kind of pressed
for time, so I'll just ask.
I've gotten myself into a minor verbal altercation with another fellow,
over email, and one of the issues that came up was how to prevent one
user from hogging all of the outbound IPv4 port numbe
In message <308e30cf-95a2-4ff0-b02c-3b2bca2cb...@lists.zabbadoz.net>,
"Bjoern A. Zeeb" wrote:
>On 19 Oct 2018, at 3:32, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
>
>> Just curious Are any of the wireless adaptors listed here:
>>
>> https://www.freebsd.
Just curious Are any of the wireless adaptors listed here:
https://www.freebsd.org/releases/12.0R/hardware.html#support
capable of doing 802.11ac?
(If so, that fact sure isn't apparent from just skimming the list of
product names.)
___
freebs
In message <201803241747.w2ohlupr069...@donotpassgo.dyslexicfish.net>,
Jamie Landeg-Jones wrote:
>Have you thought of examining the TCP timestamp field? Not necessarily
>for accurate uptime, but a way to determine if the hosts are the same.
No, I certainly didn't, but that appears to be the ex
In message <201803221856.w2miurjh027...@pdx.rh.cn85.dnsmgr.net>,
"Rodney W. Grimes" wrote:
>> Well, as someone else noted, if two IP addresses yield the exact same
>> SSH key, that is fairly definitive.
>
>Wrong, as someone else pointed out that is simply a mater of
>copying the /etc/ssh/*host*
In message <4ce048ad-873e-795e-aae0-8d795d9bb...@kicp.uchicago.edu>,
Valeri Galtsev wrote:
>If A and A' do resolve beyond their SOA for clients outside of their
>domain. That was vulnerable for abuse, and hardly anybody does that
>these days. Am I missing something?
As I understand it, sadly
In message <20180322140233.ga79...@staff.retn.net>,
Alexandre Snarskii wrote:
>DNS: if both A and A' running open recursive DNS servers (bad idea in
>modern internet, but..) it's possible to use TTL field to differentiate.
>Scenario: create some DNS record with good enough TTL of one hour. Ask
In message <201803220250.w2m2owmf024...@pdx.rh.cn85.dnsmgr.net>,
"Rodney W. Grimes" wrote:
>You are not going to prove the "control of the exact same Bad Actor"
>without a warrant to search and seize.
Well, as someone else noted, if two IP addresses yield the exact same
SSH key, that is fairly
In message <4db72389-d167-4152-a15f-4710c54b2...@your.org>,
Kevin Day wrote:
>Does the ssh-keyscan tool do what you want?
I never knew about that tool until now. But yes, indeed, that may be
the exact kind of magic I was looking for.
Thank you.
__
In message <201803212204.w2lm4g8h023...@pdx.rh.cn85.dnsmgr.net>,
"Rodney W. Grimes" wrote:
>One thing you could look at is the OS finger printing of nmap,
>that could look for possible things to diffentiate the hosts.
Yea, that idea occurred to me. But this solution has the same problem
that
"Kurt Buff" wrote:
>Do you mean that the application banners for all applications are the
>same? A comprehensive scan with nmap shows no differences?
Correct. This is the case I was/am asking about.
>I know you specified SSH as outside of the application layer, but I
>would think if it's eve
In message <5ab2d11a.6060...@grosbein.net>,
Eugene Grosbein wrote:
>If they respond truly identically, there are no reasons to treat them like
>distinct hosts
>despite of different IP addresses.
Well, for my purposes, it would be inapporpriate to make any such leap
of faith.
If address A is s
This problem has been preplexing me for ages and ages. I looked at it
again, just briefly, and re-read parts of some potentially relevant
RFCs, just the other day, but frankly, I'm just too ignorant and/or
too stupid to be able to think up a solution, so I'll just drop the
problem description her
In message <5ab2c0b1.3020...@grosbein.net>,
Eugene Grosbein wrote:
>It does not mean you need to stick with raw sockets API.
>libpcap can be used too, as I've shown in previous letter.
Thank you. If zmap ends up not suiting my needs, I will
definitely look into libpcap.
_
In message <5ab2ad9f.6040...@grosbein.net>,
Eugene Grosbein wrote:
>Why should you concentrate on RAW sockets?
Well, for reasons that are completely legitimate, and that I'll
explain in detail, if anyone is seriously interested, I'd like
to check each IPv4 address within a set of about 90 or s
In message <5ab23fb9.7050...@grosbein.net>,
Eugene Grosbein wrote:
>On 21.03.2018 10:55, Matt Joras wrote:
>> Saying "Not for FreeBSD" is needlessly confusing and not accurate. In
>> the common parlance "raw sockets" does not refer to libdnet, which is
>> not a part of the FreeBSD base system.
In message <5ab1a9c5.9050...@grosbein.net>,
Eugene Grosbein wrote:
>21.03.2018 3:09, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
>>
>> https://stackoverflow.com/questions/7048448/raw-sockets-on-bsd-operating-systems
>> "Using raw sockets isn't hard but it's no
I'm going to be doing some stuff with raw sockets pretty soon, and
while scrounging around, looking for some nice coding examples, I
found the following very curious comment on one particular message
board:
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/7048448/raw-sockets-on-bsd-operating-systems
In message ,
John Lyon wrote:
>What's your use case? If this is for a home box, developer box, or
>something that is not "enterprise production," then I wouldn't worry about
>RealTek cards bought in the last 5 years. Their 10/100 cards from 15 years
>ago were crap, which is how they earned the
I just wanted to say thanks to everyone for the suggestions and insight.
I think that I'll end up buying a used Intel PCI-E gigabit card off of
Fleabay, and that ought to do it.
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/
I need to buy a PCI-E ethernet card. It won't really matter if it
is 10/100/1000 or just 10/100 but it has to work with FreeBSD at a
minimum. It would be Nice if it was also supported by Linux and
Windoze7, but that isn't really critical.
I'm a serious cheapskate, so I'd like to spend as little
Greetings all,
I've just done a fresh install of 11.1-RELEASE onto a fresh/wiped drive
and now I'm just trying to get things tweeked to my liking, and get
everything working that should be working.
At the moment, the one and only thing that isn't working that should be
working is the "unbound" l
Sorry, I -think- I know that answer to this question, but
I'd prefer to ask and make sure, in case I have misunderstood
things.
I am aware that for any open socket, the kernel sets aside
some amount of buffer space for that socket. (And yes, I
*do* also know that the specific amount set aside ma
In message <543a4244.1000...@freebsd.org>,
Matthew Seaman wrote:
>On 12/10/2014 02:05, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
>...
>> /var/named/var/run/named/session.key
>>
>> So, um, how come? The default location wasn't good enough?
>
>You're runnin
I've just been messing around with the nsupdate program, which,
as I'm sure you all know, is part of the BIND 9 package.
For now, I'm just using in in "local" mode, i.e. invoking it with
the -l option.
I did managed to get it to perform a dynamic update, but I encountered
a cople of slight, and
In message
Kurt Buff wrote:
>On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 12:57 PM, Ronald F. Guilmette
>> The password change request was made from:
>> - IP address: 69.62.255.118
>> - ISP host: 10.2.98.245
>> ==
For those of you who didn't already hear, eBay got hacked the other
day... well... not actually the other day, but in February. But
they elected to do the decent thing and actually tell all of their
affected customers about it as soon as they found out about it.
Well, actually, they found out abo
In message <53783271.6090...@freebsd.org>,
Julian Elischer wrote:
>On 5/18/14, 7:32 AM, Michael Sierchio wrote:
>> On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 4:30 PM, Ronald F. Guilmette
>> wrote:
>>
>>> May 16 23:05:33 segfault kernel: arp: 69.62.255.254 moved from
>>
Michael Sierchio kudzu at tenebras.com wrote:
>On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 4:17 PM, Ronald F. Guilmette
> wrote:
>
>> Quite simply, I'd like to know if the defaultrouter= IPv4 address
>> specified in my /etc/rc.conf file should be the same as whatever
>> I nor
As I mentioned in my immediately prior posting here, I have been
having spurious total (100%) connectivity dropouts, quite frequently,
for some several weeks now. I have no idea what might be causing
this, and thus I am exploring everything.
Long long ago (i.e. several years ago now), I was tol
Forgive me, please for such a rudimentary sort of question. I've
been doing IP networking for more than 15 years, but I never really
plumbed the depths, and thus I only know the basics.
Quite simply, I'd like to know if the defaultrouter= IPv4 address
specified in my /etc/rc.conf file should be
In message <670072237.3089090.1361139025074.javamail.r...@erie.cs.uoguelph.ca>,
Rick Macklem wrote:
>Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
>> In message
>> <689563329.3076797.1361028594307.javamail.r...@erie.cs.uoguelph.ca>,
>> Rick Macklem wrote:
>>
>> >R
In message <689563329.3076797.1361028594307.javamail.r...@erie.cs.uoguelph.ca>,
Rick Macklem wrote:
>Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
>> nfs_server_flags="-h 192.168.1.2"
>Add -t to these flags. It appears that the default is UDP only.
YE! Thank you. That did the t
I have a 9.1-RELEASE server whose /etc/rc.conf file contains, among other
things, the following lines:
ifconfig_nfe0="inet 192.168.1.2 netmask 255.255.255.0"
#
nfs_client_enable="YES"
nfs_server_enable="YES"
nfs_server_flags="-h 192.168.1.2"
mountd_enable="YES"
rpcbind_enable="YES"
On this serv
I want to thank all of the various people who offered help, advice,
and suggestings regarding this problem. It's all really appreciated.
Since I first posted about this issue, I have diligently tried to
isolate/debug the problem. I swapped the card into a totally
different system, also running
In message ,
Damien Fleuriot wrote:
>> In the case of connecting to the laptop, all seemed to work correctly,
>> however ifconfig showed that my re0 device in this case believed itself
>> to be "master". (I suspect that this may make a difference, and that
>> the current FreeBSD re driver may
In message ,
John Nielsen wrote:
>On Feb 7, 2013, at 4:13 PM, Ronald F. Guilmette =
>wrote:
>
>> I just aquired a brand new chepie gigabit PCI ethernet card off eBay.
>> The main chip on it appears to be an RTL8110S-32.
>>...
>I would suspect the
Apologies for following up on myself, but I just now found this:
https://support.freenas.org/ticket/894
This thread would suggest that I ain't alone in experienceing this
problem with the RTL8110S.
That other guy apparently solved his problem by just simply switching
to a CAT6 cable. I how
I just aquired a brand new chepie gigabit PCI ethernet card off eBay.
The main chip on it appears to be an RTL8110S-32.
I stuck this card into a 9.1-RELEASE system that I have been putting
together, and it seemed to be recognized ok (as re0) upon boot up, so
I diddled my /etc/rc.conf file to get
In message
, Kevin Oberman wrote:
>To use WPA and a static address, you need something like:
>ifconfig_wlan0 ="WPA inet 192.168.1.21/24"
>so that was OK.
Yea, actually I did already have the static+WPA working.
>Now, you seem to have both interfaces on the same /24 with a /24
>netmask. This i
In message
, you wrote:
>for wifi - you need to configure /etc/wpa_supplicant.conf as well,
>right?
Did that. Yes.
>You don't need the ssid in the ifconfig line;
OK. If you say so. (See my prior e-mail where I wondered aloud if there
are circumstances where the ssid might have to appear i
In message
, you wrote:
>I wrote:
>> P.S. Actually, I've never tried running _both_ the wired & wireless stuff
>> on this laptop in parallel before now. Is that part of the problem? And
>> anyway, how exactly does the system establish a default route to 192.168.1.1
>> when there are two (or m
Greerings,
I am currently running 9.1-RC2 on my laptop, and I'm wondering what the
proper procedure is for reporting bugs in not-yet-released releases.
Could somebody please tell me? Should I just file a regular PR? (I've
never done this before for anything that's not an official -RELEASE,
and
In message
, you wrote:
>What's the output of 'ifconfig wlanX list sta'?
% ifconfig wlan0 list sta
ADDR AID CHAN RATE RSSI IDLE TXSEQ RXSEQ CAPS FLAG
c0:c1:c0:8b:4b:f31 11 36M 11.50 85 37120 EP AQEHTRS RSN HTCAP
WPS WME
_
Thanks Bernhard for all the additional info about the current state
of the iwn driver.
I still do have a couple more small questions however.
First it really does appear to me that even when my iwm0 device is
successfully connecting to an AP which has been set to do "N-only",
the information th
Ok so I upgraded t FreeBSD 9.0-RELEASE, and now my Intel 5100 is
automagically recognized during boot up.
I have also managed to get it all configured the way I want, and it
is now working just great... well... it is working anyway.
I still do have a couple of questions. Some things about my s
In message <201210071040.01104.bschm...@techwires.net>,
Bernhard Schmidt wrote:
>iwn(4) does support 11n, 5GHz and 40MHz channels. Though, it might
>be better to switch to 9.x as it has received many many enhancements.
OK. I suspected that might be the case. I'm glad that I asked!
Is the iw
Regarding my immediately prior mesage... NEVERMIND!
I did:
kldload if_iwn
(based on a suggestion I found on the next) and now, of course, the thing
is properly showing up as iwn0.
I do still have a couple of questions though...
After the kldload, I got message showing me the various data
Greetings,
Could anybody tell me what the current status is of kernel support
for Intel 5100 Wifi? It appears to have been undergoing testing in 2009,
but...
I have a not-too-terribly-old 8.2-release system installed on my laptop,
which I am pretty sure has an Intel 5100 WifI chip, but nothin
"Li, Qing" wrote:
>First thing comes to mind is to check if "rl0" is running in promiscuous mode.
No, the interface is NOT in promiscuous mode.
So I still don't understand how it can be receiving these packets.
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing lis
I've been slowly bringing up a fresh new 8.2-RELEASE system on one of my
static IPs, and I've set up some minimalist ipfw rules, just for the time
being, to try to protect it from Evil Invaders. I arranged for these rules
to log all unexpected inbound packets coming in via the one and only ethern
In message ,
Freddie Cash wrote:
>On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 12:52 PM, Ronald F. Guilmette
> wrote:
>> I don't want the DHCP stuff to set -no- routes at all... I still do
>> want it to create a route to 192.168.1.0/24. =C2=A0I just don't want it
>> make any chan
In message <20101123155323.ga51...@laptop.levsha.me>,
Mykola Dzham wrote:
> Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
>> This is problematic for several reasons. First, as I have learned,
>> having any interface set to "DHCP" in the /etc/rc.conf file causes
>> all sor
In message <20101123134254.gb36...@babolo.ru>,
Aleksandr A Babaylov <@babolo.ru> wrote:
>rfg:
>> My guess is that I'm doing multiple things in a substantially Wrong way.
>>
>> Any guidance would be appreciated.
>Try
>ktrace -i tftp
>and look at
>kdump
>to see how it works
Hay! Thanks for
In message <20101123133820.ga36...@babolo.ru>,
Aleksandr A Babaylov <@babolo.ru> wrote:
>On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 04:35:42AM -0800, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
>> I should say however that even this is going to produce a slightly sub-optim
>al
>> result, becaus
In message <4cebad46.2070...@acm.poly.edu>,
Boris Kochergin wrote:
>Hi. I hypothesize that ntpd is started before your rc.local script is
>run, so it uses the NAT IP and default route. Take a look at the
>dhclient.conf man page for how to ignore certain DHCP-provided
>information for an inte
I have been attempting to implment a trivial sort of TFTP client from
scratch, and its been somewhat of a humbling experience so far, and
its taught me that I don't know quite as much about BSD socket programming
as I though I did.
So anyway, maybe some kind soul here would be willing to help me
I just recently re-jigged my main server/workstation so that instead
of just having a single interface that talks to the Internet via a
single static IP, it now has, in addition to that, one other interface
(and card) that's talking to one of those little black&blue Linksys
router thingies to whic
Although the tftp protocol has, apparently, been intended from the outset
to provide support for finite-time file transfers, I myself would like to
see if I can use it in the context of a (near-)continuous streaming data
collection application.
This raises a number of issues and questions, and I'
I just wanted to drop a line and say "Thanks!" to everybody who worked on
getting support for the Linksys WMP54g v4/v4.1 (and the RT2561C chipset -
now supported by the ral(4) driver) into 7.0-RELEASE.
I'm a total wireless neophite, but after a modest amount of fiddling and
Reading of the Fine M
As I just mentioned in my immediately preceeding post, I'm a total
neophite when it come to wirless networking, so I need to ask a
rather basic question.
In preparation for installing my first ever wireless network, I read
up on the subject awhile first, and I found several people who had
comment
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, you wrote:
>On Thu, Oct 28, 2004 at 12:51:09PM -0700, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
>> What conditions may cause connect(2) to yield EPERM on 4.10-RELEASE?
>
>Being blocked by your own firewall is the one I can come up with...
YES!
Thank you
I am testing a program that I am developing that makes quite a lot of
simultaneous outbound TCP connections.
While performing the testing, one of the calls to connect(2) within the
program returned a -1 (error) result, and when the errno value was then
checked, it had a value of EPERM.
This is v
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, you wrote:
>On Thu, 21 Oct 2004, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
>
>> >I believe if you want to build a more maintainable, more adaptable,
>> >more modularized program then you should avoid two things - the threads and
>> >the
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, you wrote:
>Oh, another thing is that there isn't yet a verbose signal delivery
>mechanism.. There are only two signals that are for user's use...
^defined in relevant standards
Signal numbers are typically represented as i
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, you wrote:
>I believe if you want to build a more maintainable, more adaptable,
>more modularized program then you should avoid two things - the threads and
>the signals. If you like to use a callback behaviour of the signals you could
>easy implement it without an
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, you wrote:
>Now that we have real threads, it shuld be possible to write an aio
>library that is
> implemented by having a bunch of underlying threads..
That's a very interesting idea.
Whan you say ``Now that we have real threads...'' I assume that you
are talki
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, you wrote:
>> There are clearly cases in which one would like to perform reads
>> asynchronously, but likewise, there are cases where one might like
>> to also perform socket connects asynchronously. So how come no
>> aio_connect?
>
>In FreeBSD you can do connect(
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, you wrote:
>< said:
>
>> That's it for now... just aio_connect() and aio_accept(). If I think of
>> something else, I'll let you know.
>
>[lots of Big Picture(R) stuff elided]
>
>This is certainly an interesting model of program design.
It is very gentlemanly of
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, you wrote:
>Sorry, but there is nothing in FreeBSD that will let you program in the
>method you would like to do...
Well, _if_ there were a full and complet family of aio_*() functions
implemented in the FreeBSD kernel, _then_ I could indeed program in
the style I
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, you wrote:
>What other events than aio_connect() you are interested in?
Well, I'm glad that you asked, because after my last message in this thread
I realized that (just for the sake of symmetry, if for no other reason) it
would also be swell to have a kernel func
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, you wrote:
>> Anyway, upon further reflection (and further RTFM'ing) I am now inclined
>> towards a distinct dislike for the entire aio_*() family of functions
>> because, as I just now realized, they provide the programmer with a
>> synchronous way (i.e. the aio_e
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, you wrote:
>< said:
>
>> I'm sitting here looking at that man pages for aio_read and aio_write,
>> and the question occurs to me: ``Home come there is no such thing as
>> an aio_connect function?''
>
>Mostly because there is no need, since connect() doesn't transf
Greetings folks,
It is my understanding that when one makes a call to connect(2) in order
to, for example, make an IPv4 TCP connection to some server, a SYN packet
is sent out, and then, if neither a corresponding SYN+ACK nor any other
kind of (NACK) response is received within some specific (sho
[[This question is related vaguely to the other question that I posted
to this list a few minutes ago.]]
I'm sitting here looking at that man pages for aio_read and aio_write,
and the question occurs to me: ``Home come there is no such thing as
an aio_connect function?''
There are clearly cases
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, you wrote:
>
>On Mon, 23 Feb 2004, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
>
>> Given a socket which has been properly created, opened, and then bound
>> to some port and the special INADDR_ANY ``wildcard'' address, I need to
>> be a
Greetings,
I've been writing a specialized daemon process that will act as a sort-of
intelligent shim/proxy between SMTP clients and some user-designated SMTP
server(s), perhaps located elsewhere. The details of what the shim/proxy
will do aren't really important here, so I'll just skip straight
Greetings,
Given a socket which has been properly created, opened, and then bound
to some port and the special INADDR_ANY ``wildcard'' address, I need
to be able to them programatically find all of the IPv4 addresses that
the socket was just bound to.
Can anyone suggest a way to do this?
Can a
I have just now found out that the kernel default value for
net.inet.tcp.recvspace, i.e. the default amount of receive
buffer space associated with a new socket is set to 56kB,
at least on the specific version of FreeBSD (4.7) that I'm
running.
Just curious: why?
56kB seems like a somewhat odd
Greetings all,
I've got a port scanner that I built with my own two little hands.
It is built on top of libpcap and also libnet. It works just fine,
some of the time. It's what it does the rest of the time that bothers
me.
This is a simple-minded sort of port scanner that performs essentially
96 matches
Mail list logo
