On Wed, Jun 15, 2005 at 02:32:19PM -0400, Josh Kayse wrote:
> On 6/15/05, Gleb Smirnoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > AFAIU, you use PLIP line as some flag that triggers suppression. If
> > slave "sees" master via PLIP, it keeps itself in slave mode. May be
> > I don't understand you right.
>
On 6/15/05, Gleb Smirnoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> AFAIU, you use PLIP line as some flag that triggers suppression. If
> slave "sees" master via PLIP, it keeps itself in slave mode. May be
> I don't understand you right.
>
> Although the idea is not officially supported, it is interesting. C
On Mon, Jun 13, 2005 at 12:00:36PM -0400, Josh Kayse wrote:
J> The reason we are using CARP on a PLIP interface is to allow us to
J> have redundant connections between 2 transparent bridging firewalls.
J> Instead of sending packets over our network, we isolate them onto a
J> PLIP interface and cro
On Mon, Jun 13, 2005 at 12:00:36PM -0400, Josh Kayse wrote:
> Definitely a typo on my part. It should be
> ifp->if_link_state = LINK_STATE_UP
>
> The reason we are using CARP on a PLIP interface is to allow us to
> have redundant connections between 2 transparent bridging firewalls.
> Instead of
On Mon, Jun 13, 2005 at 01:35:12PM -0400, Josh Kayse wrote:
> On 6/13/05, Greg Hennessy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > We then use
> > > ifstaded to monitor the carp interfaces and shut down
> > > bridging on one of the machines.
> >
> > Spanning tree is a no brainer for such a setup, pfsync ta
On 6/13/05, Greg Hennessy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > The reason we are using CARP on a PLIP interface is to allow
> > us to have redundant connections between 2 transparent
> > bridging firewalls.
>
> CARP is not going to work with a layer 2 firewall.
It's running over the PLIP interface an
> The reason we are using CARP on a PLIP interface is to allow
> us to have redundant connections between 2 transparent
> bridging firewalls.
CARP is not going to work with a layer 2 firewall.
> Instead of sending packets over our network, we isolate them
> onto a PLIP interface and crosso
Definitely a typo on my part. It should be
ifp->if_link_state = LINK_STATE_UP
The reason we are using CARP on a PLIP interface is to allow us to
have redundant connections between 2 transparent bridging firewalls.
Instead of sending packets over our network, we isolate them onto a
PLIP interface
On Mon, Jun 13, 2005 at 10:10:54AM -0400, Josh Kayse wrote:
> One last comment,
>
> I managed to fix it so that carp runs on the plip interface by adding:
> ifp->if_flags = LINK_STATE_UP;
>
> Here is the diff:
>
> diff -Nur /usr.orig/src/sys/dev/ppbus/if_plip.c
> /usr/src/sys/dev/ppbus/if_plip.
Hey all,
Honestly I have no idea what this is all about, but saw something in the
change adding "ipf->if_flags=LINK_STATE_UP;" that just seemed really strange
from a programming standpoint. Doesn't this statement "undo" the effects of
the line just before it (ipf->if_flags |= IFF_RUNNING).
Again
One last comment,
I managed to fix it so that carp runs on the plip interface by adding:
ifp->if_flags = LINK_STATE_UP;
Here is the diff:
diff -Nur /usr.orig/src/sys/dev/ppbus/if_plip.c /usr/src/sys/dev/ppbus/if_plip.c
--- /usr.orig/src/sys/dev/ppbus/if_plip.c Wed Sep 15 11:14:18 2004
+++
I think I've narrowed it down to the plip interface, but I'm not
completely sure. Has anyone gotten carp running over a plip
interface?
On 6/10/05, Josh Kayse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I am cross-posting this to -net and -pf because I am not sure where it goes.
>
> I am running 2 carp interfa
12 matches
Mail list logo
