Re: Intel 82574 issue reported on Slashdot

2013-02-11 Thread Sean Bruno
On Fri, 2013-02-08 at 10:16 -0800, Jack Vogel wrote: > For those that may have run across the story on Slashdot about this NIC, > here is our statement: > > Recently there were a few stories published, based on a blog post by an > end-user, suggesting specific network packets may cause the IntelĀ®

Re: Intel 82574 issue reported on Slashdot

2013-02-09 Thread matt
On 02/09/13 09:15, Johnny Eriksson wrote: >> In all honesty.. The blog post (and your email) are basically >> information free, they don't name names and provide no script >> or downloadable code that will allow end users to check if they >> are affected. > A link with a little bit more information

Re: Intel 82574 issue reported on Slashdot

2013-02-09 Thread Kurt Jaeger
Hi! > We don't even have the tool tcpreplay in the ports mentioned in that BLOG. net-mgmt/tcpreplay is not the same ? -- p...@opsec.eu+49 171 3101372 7 years to go ! ___ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://l

Re: Intel 82574 issue reported on Slashdot

2013-02-09 Thread Krzysztof Barcikowski
W dniu 2013-02-09 13:17, O. Hartmann pisze: We don't even have the tool tcpreplay in the ports mentioned in that BLOG. oh base2[/usr/ports]# make search name=tcpreplay Port: tcpreplay-3.4.4 Path: /usr/ports/net-mgmt/tcpreplay Info: A tool to replay saved packet capture files Maint: eha

Re: Intel 82574 issue reported on Slashdot

2013-02-09 Thread O. Hartmann
Am 02/09/13 09:15, schrieb Johnny Eriksson: >> In all honesty.. The blog post (and your email) are basically >> information free, they don't name names and provide no script >> or downloadable code that will allow end users to check if they >> are affected. > > A link with a little bit more inform

Re: Intel 82574 issue reported on Slashdot

2013-02-09 Thread Daniel O'Connor
On 09/02/2013, at 20:42, Parv wrote: >> "Contact your motherboard manufacturer" is much more time >> consuming than "Run sysctl... | grep foo | awk ..." to see if your >> system is affected. > > Gift^WStraight from horse's mouth ... > > http://blog.krisk.org/2013/02/packets-of-death.html I've

Re: Intel 82574 issue reported on Slashdot

2013-02-09 Thread Parv
in message , wrote Daniel O'Connor thusly... > > > On 09/02/2013, at 4:46, Jack Vogel wrote: > > > recommends contacting your motherboard manufacturer if you have > > continued concerns or questions whether your products are > > impacted. Here is the link: > > > > http://communities.intel.com/com

Re: Intel 82574 issue reported on Slashdot

2013-02-09 Thread Johnny Eriksson
> In all honesty.. The blog post (and your email) are basically > information free, they don't name names and provide no script > or downloadable code that will allow end users to check if they > are affected. A link with a little bit more information: http://blog.krisk.org/2013/02/packets-of-d

Re: Intel 82574 issue reported on Slashdot

2013-02-08 Thread Daniel O'Connor
On 09/02/2013, at 4:46, Jack Vogel wrote: > recommends contacting your motherboard manufacturer if you have continued > concerns or questions whether your products are impacted. > Here is the link: > > http://communities.intel.com/community/wired/blog/2013/02/07/intel-82574l-gigabit-ethernet-co

Re: Intel 82574 issue reported on Slashdot

2013-02-08 Thread Artem Belevich
Jack, How do I tell whether my motherboards are made by 'specific manufacturer' and whether NICs there are affected? Broadcasting packet of death is not a very good method in production environment. EEPROM dump on my 82574L NICs on Supermicro X9SAE-V motherboard do match the 'bad' EEPROM mentione