Re: Use lagg(4) or Use Layer-4 Load Balancing?

Martes G Wigglesworth wrote: I was attempting to find good information on how to achieve a type of bonding using advanced routing on FreeBSD, such as with layer-4 routers, that can bond multiple sources into a single overall larger source for logical backbone creation for networks. You could h

Re: VLAN problems

Tom Judge wrote: > Andrei Kolu wrote: >>> Alexandre Biancalana wrote: This server is an Dell Power Edge 1950, QuadCore 2.83, 2Gb Ram, one bce gigabit interface connected to a gigabit port of a Cisco 4500 in trunk mode. >> >> Why you are using trunk mode? IIRC then "trunk" is used o

Re: IPv6 <-> NAT <-> IPv4 ... possible?

Marc G. Fournier wrote: > > Could I hide an IPv6 network behind NAT? I don't know if that is even > possible > ... the IPv6 IPs would be private (equiv to 192.168.x.x) ... basically, none > of > the hosts behind NAT need a public IP, *but* I may end up with more then 256 > hosts, so was wond

Re: Sub-interfaces.

On Sat, 21 Oct 2006, Peter Ankerst?l wrote: I've looked all over the web for some tutorials on how to create sub-interfaces i FreeBSD.. Something like fxp0.1 Do you mean just additional addresses on an interface like http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/configtuning-vir

Re: PAM + radius

On Mon, 27 Mar 2006, Aymeric MUNTZ wrote: Hello, I'm trying to set authentication against Radius on my box. I modified my /etc/pam.d/telnetd file for: ___ |authrequiredpam_radius.so conf=/etc/radius.conf |account requiredpam_radius.so |session requi

Re: vr0: rx packet lost

On Mon, 6 Mar 2006, Andrea Venturoli wrote: Hello. I've just installed 6.0/AMD64 on an Asus A8V, which features a vr interface. I'm getting tons of "vr0: rx packet lost" kernel messages as soon as I start transfering some files on my LAN. Needless to say, network performance is VERY poor (r

Re: socket / bind - specific address

On Sat, 25 Feb 2006, Brian Candler wrote: On Sat, Feb 25, 2006 at 06:07:22PM +1100, Edwin Groothuis wrote: The situation is as follows: We have a couple of FreeBSD routers, with RFC1918 addresses on the ethernets and a public address on the loopback. This works fine for connecting to the rout

Re: urgent: RELENG_5 ipfw/nat/IPSEC Problem..

On Wed, 19 Oct 2005, Holm Tiffe wrote: Hi, I have a currently big problem with the following setup: A FreeBSD Box, running 5_STABLE is connected wirh one interface to the public, with the other to an nated' subnet with private address space. I need to allow at least one host from inside the

Re: FreeBSD Firewall + NAT Traversal + IPsec

On Sat, 9 Apr 2005, John Mok wrote: To my understanding, the mechanism of how NAT works is that, the client connections from the intranet are mapped to separate ports on the NAT with one single IP address by means of a mapping table, such that the reply packet from the outside to the NAT could

Re: Bridge

On Mon, 1 Nov 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi everybody! I'm try configure bridge on FreeBSD box. Box configuration: %uname -srp FreeBSD 5.3-RC1 i386 %ifconfig xl0: flags=8943 mtu 1500 options=9 ether 00:04:79:68:02:e6 media: Ethernet autoselect (none) status: n

Re: Networking/Security Question...

On Fri, 10 Sep 2004, Dan wrote: > Hello. Hi Dan, > My first post here, Hope you're all well and enjoying the summer. > Okay, this is likely to be an extremely exhaustive post, so I'd really be grateful if you could spare the time to read and reply please... > > Let me first introduce you to th

Re: FreeBSD VPN performance

On Tue, 7 Sep 2004, Omer Faruk Sen wrote: > Hi, > > I have given a work to test VPN performance of FreeBSD IPSEC subsystem. I am > not that familiar with ipsec terms. (just started to read IPSEC documents > about 5 days ago)I wanted to share my observations: > > My hardware is : P IV 2.8, 256 MB