> the cisco bonding (ng_nge from Bill Paul, though it doesn't really
> use netgraph properly) and the netgraph atm stack.
I just noticed you commit this, very cool. I'll have to play with this
as soon as it's MFC'd. -sc
--
Sean Chittenden
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "un
On Mon, 28 Oct 2002, Don Bowman wrote:
> > From: Julian Elischer [mailto:julian@;elischer.org]
> > > Is there support for 802.3ad in FreeBSD? This would be the best
> > > way to gang interfaces together in a standard fashion. It involves
> > > LACP (Link Aggregation Control Protocol), which prev
> From: Julian Elischer [mailto:julian@;elischer.org]
> > Is there support for 802.3ad in FreeBSD? This would be the best
> > way to gang interfaces together in a standard fashion. It involves
> > LACP (Link Aggregation Control Protocol), which prevents loops
> > @ L2 (I think its an extension of S
On Mon, 28 Oct 2002, Don Bowman wrote:
> From: Julian Elischer [mailto:julian@;elischer.org]
> > On Mon, 28 Oct 2002, Sean Chittenden wrote:
>
> > > In this example, does the xl0 interface share the same MAC address?
> >
> > umm actually, yes.. sends switches insane.. :-)
> > if you don't do t
From: Julian Elischer [mailto:julian@;elischer.org]
> On Mon, 28 Oct 2002, Sean Chittenden wrote:
> > In this example, does the xl0 interface share the same MAC address?
>
> umm actually, yes.. sends switches insane.. :-)
> if you don't do the step about source Mac address replacement
> then they
On Mon, 28 Oct 2002, Sean Chittenden wrote:
> > *This message was transferred with a trial version of CommuniGate(tm) Pro*
> > Sean Chittenden wrote:
> > >... Can't say as its graceful, but it's certainly a poor-man's way
> > >of getting more than 100Mbps of capacity.
> >
> > have you tried thi
> *This message was transferred with a trial version of CommuniGate(tm) Pro*
> Sean Chittenden wrote:
> >... Can't say as its graceful, but it's certainly a poor-man's way
> >of getting more than 100Mbps of capacity.
>
> have you tried this?
> http://bsdvault.net/sections.php?op=viewarticle&artid
> > >>> I have two systems connected through a common network
> > >>> (switch). They each have two NICs, with one addressed on one
> > >>> IP network and the second on another. IP works fine. My
> > >>> problem is that the kernel keeps bitching about seeing the
> > >>> same MAC addresses on both
On Saturday, Oct 26, 2002, at 21:36 US/Pacific, Don Bowman wrote:
This can also be seen, believe it or not, on a routed
network, if you have something like spanning tree
protocol which hasn't converged yet, but has been set
for rapid convergence (which assumes the path isn't
a loop until it disc
On Saturday, Oct 26, 2002, at 20:24 US/Pacific, Julian Elischer wrote:
Don't get snooty..
the question is :"why do you want to do that?
Is it to get more bandwidth?
The answer is: None of your business. It was a simple technical
question, to which I was given a simple technical answer, which
> From: Julian Elischer [mailto:julian@;elischer.org]
(removed as to why have two NICs on the same network,
sending for general enlightenment of the list...)
This is reasonably common in L2 switched Ethernet. You have
a device which segments the traffic just fine with
MAC learning. You have the
On Sat, 26 Oct 2002, Kevin Stevens wrote:
>
> On Saturday, Oct 26, 2002, at 16:20 US/Pacific, Julian Elischer wrote:
>
> >
> > On Sat, 26 Oct 2002, Don Bowman wrote:
> >
> >> Kevin Stevens wrote:
> >>> I have two systems connected through a common network (switch). They
> >>> each have two NI
On Saturday, Oct 26, 2002, at 16:20 US/Pacific, Julian Elischer wrote:
On Sat, 26 Oct 2002, Don Bowman wrote:
Kevin Stevens wrote:
I have two systems connected through a common network (switch). They
each have two NICs, with one addressed on one IP network and the
second
on another. IP wo
ECTED]>;
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sat Oct 26 19:20:12 2002
Subject: RE: Annoying ARP warning messages.
On Sat, 26 Oct 2002, Don Bowman wrote:
> Kevin Stevens wrote:
> > I have two systems connected through a common network (switch). They
> > each have t
On Sat, 26 Oct 2002, Don Bowman wrote:
> Kevin Stevens wrote:
> > I have two systems connected through a common network (switch). They
> > each have two NICs, with one addressed on one IP network and the second
> > on another. IP works fine. My problem is that the kernel keeps
> > bitching
On Saturday, Oct 26, 2002, at 14:28 US/Pacific, Don Bowman wrote:
systcl net.link.ether.inet.log_arp_wrong_iface=0
Gee, why didn't that permutation of keystrokes occur to me? ;)
Thanks.
KeS
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the me
Kevin Stevens wrote:
> I have two systems connected through a common network (switch). They
> each have two NICs, with one addressed on one IP network and the second
> on another. IP works fine. My problem is that the kernel keeps
> bitching about seeing the same MAC addresses on both interfa
17 matches
Mail list logo
