On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 4:01 PM, wrote:
>> > I would like to get rtadvd to send RAs completely *without* a prefix
>> > info option. My Juniper routers at work can do this just fine...
>>
>> Oh I see. I haven't tried this case with FreeBSD configuring RA with
>> default route info only. So, how yo
On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 4:52 PM, wrote:
>> > In IPv6 it should be possible to generate a Router Advertisement which
>> > contains no prefix options (the idea being that I want the host to
>> > populate its default router list but nothing else). However, I cannot
>> > seem to get rtadvd to do this
On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 11:19 AM, Siquijor Philips
wrote:
>> On Wed, 10 Nov 2010, sth...@nethelp.no wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>>
>> In IPv6 it should be possible to generate a Router Advertisement which
>> contains no prefix options (the idea being that I want
> On Wed, 10 Nov 2010, sth...@nethelp.no wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>
> In IPv6 it should be possible to generate a Router Advertisement which
> contains no prefix options (the idea being that I want the host to
> populate its default router list but nothing else). However, I cannot
> seem to get rtadvd to d
Hi,
I'm currently doing IPv6 conformance testing with FreeBSD-7.1 RELEASE
however I've encountered DAD timing issue on Intel Gigabit NICs with
em(4) driver. I configure several tweaks on net.inet6.ip6.dad_count
such as 2 seconds, 3 seconds and 4 seconds just to get the specific
DAD timing on each
ing is there except the support in the driver then I might be able
> to add that to
> my queue.
>
Yes, please because I really need to have my IPsec infra working sooner.
Thank you so much!
Siquijor
> Cheers,
>
> Jack
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 9:14 PM, Siquijor
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 1:45 AM, Pyun YongHyeon wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 08, 2009 at 01:24:20PM +0800, Siquijor Philips wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I got a dual-port Intel Gigabit NIC with 82576 (ET) chipset
>> http://www.intel.com/Assets/PDF/prodbrief/320116.pdf. It has a feature
Hi,
I got a dual-port Intel Gigabit NIC with 82576 (ET) chipset
http://www.intel.com/Assets/PDF/prodbrief/320116.pdf. It has a feature
on IPsec offloading but it only mentioned Microsoft Windows 2008 and
Vista servers. I wonder if FreeBSD have also support on this feature?
Thanks,
Siquijor
__
Hello Ivan,
>> Try reducing the number of CPUs, it might help by reducing contention.
>
> Ok, I'll try.
>
I have tested reducing the number of CPUs but it was helpless because
it causes my system to hang.
Regards,
Siquijor
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org m
Hello Ivan,
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156)
--enig69E41D4C44B97AD296C94242
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Siquijor Philips wrote:
> Hello Eugene,
>=20
>> Traffic bandwidth does not matter (
Hello Eugene,
> Traffic bandwidth does not matter (or much less), PPS rate matters.
> Packets drop due to high pps rate. Higher packet size, lesser pps
> saturates link and pps just can't grow high. It can with smaller packets.
>
All the test scenarios here are bombarded with 1-Gig of network
tra
Can someone explain why FreeBSD network throughput (both incoming and
outgoing traffic) decreases when smaller frame size being processed?
With smaller frame size, corresponding packet rate (packet/sec or pps)
increases and experiencing dropped packets. What causes dropping of
packets with small fr
Hi,
FreeBSD-7.1 is shipped with TCP segmentation offload (TSO) feature to
some network interface cards by default such as Intel and Broadcom. I
would like to know if there's any impact when PF is enabled together
with TSO in terms of performance and packet inspection?
Thank you,
Regards,
Siquijo
13 matches
Mail list logo
