On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 11:50 AM, Randall Stewart wrote:
> All
>
> Ok I fixed it ;-)
>
> Its in SVN r249848.
>
> I will see about getting it to 9 stable, 8 stable and maybe even
> 8.4 if RE will let me ;-)
>
Great work. Thanks so much. I was afraid this would linger forever!
> R
> On Apr 23, 201
On 24 April 2013 12:11, Ed Maste wrote:
> On 24 April 2013 14:57, Adrian Chadd wrote:
>> Is this an issue on -7 and -6?
>
> I believe so, and it should get merged there as well.
rrs - prty please? :)
adrian
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org maili
On 24 April 2013 14:57, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> Is this an issue on -7 and -6?
I believe so, and it should get merged there as well.
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any ma
Is this an issue on -7 and -6?
(Since people do still run it, and it seems a simple enough fix?)
adrian
On 24 April 2013 11:50, Randall Stewart wrote:
> All
>
> Ok I fixed it ;-)
>
> Its in SVN r249848.
>
> I will see about getting it to 9 stable, 8 stable and maybe even
> 8.4 if RE will let
All
Ok I fixed it ;-)
Its in SVN r249848.
I will see about getting it to 9 stable, 8 stable and maybe even
8.4 if RE will let me ;-)
R
On Apr 23, 2013, at 9:40 AM, Tom Evans wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 1:08 PM, Randall Stewart wrote:
>> Ok
>>
>> I too have been struck by this *multiple*
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 1:08 PM, Randall Stewart wrote:
> Ok
>
> I too have been struck by this *multiple* times on my base home router.
>
I hate "me too" style posts, since often they conflate unrelated
issues - however, "me too"!
In my scenario, I have a simple home router with a wan if connec
Ok
I too have been struck by this *multiple* times on my base home router.
I am not sure how its happening, but I have placed in my kernel a special
catch that if the default route is set via the normal route.c path and it
is *not* the default route to my ISP, I will crash the kernel.
My thought
On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 12:51 PM, Li, Qing wrote:
> Hi,
>
>>
>> I can confirm I get these messages as well:
>>
>> Mar 7 19:40:25 opole kernel: arpresolve: can't allocate llinfo for
>> 86.58.122.125
>> Mar 7 19:40:25 opole kernel: arpresolve: can't allocate llinfo for
>> 86.58.122.125
>>
>> IP 86.
Hi,
>
> I can confirm I get these messages as well:
>
> Mar 7 19:40:25 opole kernel: arpresolve: can't allocate llinfo for
> 86.58.122.125
> Mar 7 19:40:25 opole kernel: arpresolve: can't allocate llinfo for
> 86.58.122.125
>
> IP 86.58.122.125 is not from IP pool used by me.
>
This kernel
On 07.03.2013 20:27, Krzysztof Barcikowski wrote:
W dniu 2013-03-07 18:09, Andre Oppermann pisze:
On 07.03.2013 17:54, Nick Rogers wrote:
I'm not sure. I have not explicitly enabled/disabled it. I am using
the GENERIC kernel from 9.1 plus PF+ALTQ.
# sysctl net.inet.flowtable.enable
sysctl: unk
W dniu 2013-03-07 18:09, Andre Oppermann pisze:
On 07.03.2013 17:54, Nick Rogers wrote:
I'm not sure. I have not explicitly enabled/disabled it. I am using
the GENERIC kernel from 9.1 plus PF+ALTQ.
# sysctl net.inet.flowtable.enable
sysctl: unknown oid 'net.inet.flowtable.enable'
# sysctl -a |
On 07.03.2013 17:54, Nick Rogers wrote:
I'm not sure. I have not explicitly enabled/disabled it. I am using
the GENERIC kernel from 9.1 plus PF+ALTQ.
# sysctl net.inet.flowtable.enable
sysctl: unknown oid 'net.inet.flowtable.enable'
# sysctl -a | grep flow
kern.sigqueue.overflow: 0
net.inet.tcp.
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 12:25 AM, Andre Oppermann wrote:
> On 05.03.2013 18:39, Nick Rogers wrote:
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I am attempting to create awareness of a serious issue affecting users
>> of FreeBSD 9.x and PF. There appears to be a bug that allows the
>> kernel's routing table to be corrupted
I'm not sure. I have not explicitly enabled/disabled it. I am using
the GENERIC kernel from 9.1 plus PF+ALTQ.
# sysctl net.inet.flowtable.enable
sysctl: unknown oid 'net.inet.flowtable.enable'
# sysctl -a | grep flow
kern.sigqueue.overflow: 0
net.inet.tcp.reass.overflows: 0
net.inet6.ip6.auto_flow
Courtland,
the arpresolve observation is very important. Do you have flowtable
enabled in your kernel?
--
Andre
On 06.03.2013 17:16, Adrian Chadd wrote:
Another instance of it..
Adrian
On 6 March 2013 07:21, Courtland wrote:
Has there been any progress on resolving this problem. Does anyone
Another instance of it..
Adrian
On 6 March 2013 07:21, Courtland wrote:
> Has there been any progress on resolving this problem. Does anyone have a
> better idea as to where it is breaking down?
>
> I am experiencing the same problem under FreeBSD 9.1-RELEASE. I use PF for
> NAT, ALTQ, and RD
I believe I don't have flowtable suport in kernel (no FLOWTABLE option),
and no sysctl's related to flowtable.
How to check if I'm using multiple pfil hooks?
Best regards!
Krzysiek
W dniu 2013-03-06 10:13, Ermal Luçi pisze:
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 9:38 AM, Krzysztof Barcikowski <
krzys...@airn
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 9:38 AM, Krzysztof Barcikowski <
krzys...@airnet.opole.pl> wrote:
> W dniu 2013-03-06 09:25, Andre Oppermann pisze:
>
> Can you describe your traffic forwarding setup in more detail?
>> Is it only pf, or do you run netgraph, or other things as well?
>> Do you use flow routi
On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 09:25:21AM +0100, Andre Oppermann wrote:
> I'm trying to create a stack graph to see which parts of the network
> stack are involved in handling your packet.
Ask people if they're using multiple pfil hooks (even just having
ipfilter loaded counts, for instance).
If that's
W dniu 2013-03-06 09:25, Andre Oppermann pisze:
Can you describe your traffic forwarding setup in more detail?
Is it only pf, or do you run netgraph, or other things as well?
Do you use flow routing?
How frequent does this happen?
I'm trying to create a stack graph to see which parts of the net
On 05.03.2013 18:39, Nick Rogers wrote:
Hello,
I am attempting to create awareness of a serious issue affecting users
of FreeBSD 9.x and PF. There appears to be a bug that allows the
kernel's routing table to be corrupted by traffic routing through the
system. Under heavy traffic load, the defau
It's a known problem; it just seems that it doesn't overlap/intersect
the day to day activities of any network focused freebsd developers.
If you guys want it fixed then you may have to find a developer to
hire on contract to fix it, or find some kind of ruleset/traffic
generation setup that relia
Hi,
I can say also i faced this problem in 9.1-preRelease. And i'm not using
pf, i usyally use ipfw. but i didn't see this happening for a while...
Sami
On Mar 5, 2013 7:39 PM, "Nick Rogers" wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am attempting to create awareness of a serious issue affecting users
> of FreeBSD 9
Hello,
I am attempting to create awareness of a serious issue affecting users
of FreeBSD 9.x and PF. There appears to be a bug that allows the
kernel's routing table to be corrupted by traffic routing through the
system. Under heavy traffic load, the default route can seemingly
randomly change to
24 matches
Mail list logo
