On Friday, March 21, 2025 8:22:56 AM UTC Paul Vixie wrote:
> This is a reply to the second of two of Julian's recent messages.
>
> On Friday, March 14, 2025 4:45:48 AM UTC Julian Elischer wrote:
>
> > I think the order of evaluation would be Process FIB highest priority,
> > followed by interface
On Fri, Mar 21, 2025 at 08:13:59AM +, Paul Vixie wrote:
> This is a reply to the first of two of Julian's recent messages.
>
> On Friday, March 14, 2025 4:26:30 AM UTC Julian Elischer wrote:
> > On 1/28/25 12:09 AM, Mark Johnston wrote:
> > > On Sat, Jan 25, 2025 at 08:44:25PM +, Paul Vixi
This is a reply to the second of two of Julian's recent messages.
On Friday, March 14, 2025 4:45:48 AM UTC Julian Elischer wrote:
> On 2/21/25 8:35 AM, Paul Vixie wrote:
> > On Thursday, February 20, 2025 4:47:41 PM UTC Mark Johnston wrote:
> >> On Tue, Feb 18, 2025 at 05:16:07AM +, Paul Vixie
This is a reply to the first of two of Julian's recent messages.
On Friday, March 14, 2025 4:26:30 AM UTC Julian Elischer wrote:
> On 1/28/25 12:09 AM, Mark Johnston wrote:
> > On Sat, Jan 25, 2025 at 08:44:25PM +, Paul Vixie wrote:
> >> does anyone remember why the FIB of a socket or process
On Friday, February 21, 2025 12:35:17 AM UTC Paul Vixie wrote:
> On Thursday, February 20, 2025 4:47:41 PM UTC Mark Johnston wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 18, 2025 at 05:16:07AM +, Paul Vixie wrote:
> > > this is the second fibnum patch, ...
now third, having ported the work to origin/main as of last
On Thursday, February 20, 2025 4:47:41 PM UTC Mark Johnston wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 18, 2025 at 05:16:07AM +, Paul Vixie wrote:
> > this is the second fibnum patch, ...
>
> The high-level changes seem to be:
> - If a TCP listening socket's FIB is 0, then the FIB of incoming
> connections matche
On Tue, Feb 18, 2025 at 05:16:07AM +, Paul Vixie wrote:
> this is the second fibnum patch, which replaces (doesn't add to) the first.
> some blanks/tabs/margins lint was incidentally fixed, a few comments were
> added, the API of several existing functions was changed, and some wrappers
> we
this is the second fibnum patch, which replaces (doesn't add to) the first.
some blanks/tabs/margins lint was incidentally fixed, a few comments were
added, the API of several existing functions was changed, and some wrappers
were added to others. as explained inline below, this handles both TCP
On Tue, Dec 17, 2024 at 01:15:07PM -0500, Mark Johnston wrote:
> Lately I've been working on adding FIB awareness to bind(2) and inpcb lookup.
> Below I'll describe the project a bit. Any feedback/comments/suggestions
> would
> be appreciated.
>
> Today, a TCP or UDP socket can receive connectio
On Sat, Jan 25, 2025 at 08:44:25PM +, Paul Vixie wrote:
> On Monday, January 13, 2025 6:59:20 PM UTC Mark Johnston wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 12, 2025 at 07:17:48AM +, Paul Vixie wrote:
> > > On Saturday, January 11, 2025 4:51:07 PM UTC Mark Johnston wrote:
> > > > On Sat, Jan 11, 2025 at 06:25
On Monday, January 13, 2025 6:59:20 PM UTC Mark Johnston wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 12, 2025 at 07:17:48AM +, Paul Vixie wrote:
> > On Saturday, January 11, 2025 4:51:07 PM UTC Mark Johnston wrote:
> > > On Sat, Jan 11, 2025 at 06:25:22AM +, Paul Vixie wrote:
> >
> > this is exactly my understan
On Sun, Jan 12, 2025 at 07:17:48AM +, Paul Vixie wrote:
> On Saturday, January 11, 2025 4:51:07 PM UTC Mark Johnston wrote:
> > On Sat, Jan 11, 2025 at 06:25:22AM +, Paul Vixie wrote:
> > > ... the SYN|ACK will always use the FIB from the interface where
> > > the SYN arrived (this is in tc
On Saturday, January 11, 2025 4:51:07 PM UTC Mark Johnston wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 11, 2025 at 06:25:22AM +, Paul Vixie wrote:
> > On Monday, January 6, 2025 3:56:55 PM UTC Mark Johnston wrote:
> > > On Fri, Dec 27, 2024 at 08:48:48AM +, Paul Vixie wrote:
> > ...
> >
> > x = y || z;
> >
On Sat, Jan 11, 2025 at 06:25:22AM +, Paul Vixie wrote:
> On Monday, January 6, 2025 3:56:55 PM UTC Mark Johnston wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 27, 2024 at 08:48:48AM +, Paul Vixie wrote:
> > > ...
>
> > I think the patch is probably a good idea, and the trick of only
> > inheriting the packet's
On Monday, January 6, 2025 3:56:55 PM UTC Mark Johnston wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 27, 2024 at 08:48:48AM +, Paul Vixie wrote:
> > ...
> I think the patch is probably a good idea, and the trick of only
> inheriting the packet's FIB if the socket's is non-zero would avoid
> breaking compatibility for
On Fri, Dec 27, 2024 at 08:48:48AM +, Paul Vixie wrote:
> On Tuesday, December 24, 2024 3:34:45 AM UTC Santiago Martinez wrote:
> > Hi,
> > here’s another user of fibs. Each of our servers have multiple fibs and
> > jails with fibs. I like the proposed.
> > Santi
>
> Cool. Read on.
>
> On Tue
Julian <>
For UDP one must already scan the interface list both initially and
periodically to find possible source addresses and bind a socket to each. This
is what makes it possible to answer a DNS request from the source address if
the request's destination address.
While it would be sim
On 12/24/24 1:06 PM, Jamie Landeg-Jones wrote:
Paul Vixie wrote:
i've been thinking along these lines for a few years now, since my vm server is
multi-fib.
each interface has a fib, mostly zero. for incoming TCP SYNs, i'd like to carry
that fib# into
the resulting PCB so that that fib's rout
> On 21.12.2024 19:34, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
> > How much use are FIBs still these days? Half of the original use cases
> > I can think of could easily and better be overcome by using vnet jails
> > with a physical or virtual interface (e.g, vcc) being delegated to the
> > vnet.
Among the other h
On Tuesday, December 24, 2024 3:34:45 AM UTC Santiago Martinez wrote:
> Hi,
> here’s another user of fibs. Each of our servers have multiple fibs and
> jails with fibs. I like the proposed.
> Santi
Cool. Read on.
On Tuesday, December 24, 2024 5:06:32 AM UTC Jamie Landeg-Jones wrote:
> Paul Vixie
Paul Vixie wrote:
> i've been thinking along these lines for a few years now, since my vm server
> is multi-fib.
> each interface has a fib, mostly zero. for incoming TCP SYNs, i'd like to
> carry that fib# into
> the resulting PCB so that that fib's routing table and especially its default
Hi,
here’s another user of fibs. Each of our servers have multiple fibs and jails
with fibs.
I like the proposed.
Santi
> On 23 Dec 2024, at 16:46, Paul Vixie wrote:
>
>
> On Monday, December 23, 2024 7:23:35 PM UTC Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
> > On Sat, 21 Dec 2024, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
> >
On Monday, December 23, 2024 7:23:35 PM UTC Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
> On Sat, 21 Dec 2024, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
> >> Any thoughts/comments?
> >
> > That all said with your opt-in approach if the code itself doesn't bring
> > too many new complications I'd be happy with it (assuming FIBs still
> > h
On Sat, 21 Dec 2024, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
Any thoughts/comments?
That all said with your opt-in approach if the code itself doesn't bring
too many new complications I'd be happy with it (assuming FIBs still
have a use case).
Seems there's plenty people using multi-FIB in various scenarios s
On Mon, 23 Dec 2024 13:29:01 +0300
"Andrey V. Elsukov" wrote:
> On 21.12.2024 19:34, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
> > How much use are FIBs still these days? Half of the original use cases
> > I can think of could easily and better be overcome by using vnet jails
> > with a physical or virtual interfac
On 21.12.2024 19:34, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
How much use are FIBs still these days? Half of the original use cases
I can think of could easily and better be overcome by using vnet jails
with a physical or virtual interface (e.g, vcc) being delegated to the
vnet.
I wonder if anyone on FreeBSD is
"Bjoern A. Zeeb" wrote:
> I wonder if anyone on FreeBSD is using FIBs to actually have multi-FIB
> forwardig but that very little touches your use case apart from the mgmt
> which again can be factored out better (or inversely, factoring out the
> forwarding).
>
> I would honestly know who and h
W dniu 21.12.2024 o 17:34, Bjoern A. Zeeb pisze:
On Tue, 17 Dec 2024, Mark Johnston wrote:
Lately I've been working on adding FIB awareness to bind(2) and inpcb
lookup.
Below I'll describe the project a bit. Any
feedback/comments/suggestions would
be appreciated.
Today, a TCP or UDP socket
On Sat, 21 Dec 2024 16:34:25 + (UTC)
"Bjoern A. Zeeb" wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Dec 2024, Mark Johnston wrote:
>
> > Lately I've been working on adding FIB awareness to bind(2) and
> > inpcb lookup. Below I'll describe the project a bit. Any
> > feedback/comments/suggestions would be appreciated.
On Sat, Dec 21, 2024 at 04:34:25PM +, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Dec 2024, Mark Johnston wrote:
>
> > Lately I've been working on adding FIB awareness to bind(2) and inpcb
> > lookup.
> > Below I'll describe the project a bit. Any feedback/comments/suggestions
> > would
> > be appre
On Sat, Dec 21, 2024 at 04:34:25PM +, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Dec 2024, Mark Johnston wrote:
>
> > Lately I've been working on adding FIB awareness to bind(2) and inpcb
> > lookup.
> > Below I'll describe the project a bit. Any feedback/comments/suggestions
> > would
> > be appre
On Tue, 17 Dec 2024, Mark Johnston wrote:
Lately I've been working on adding FIB awareness to bind(2) and inpcb lookup.
Below I'll describe the project a bit. Any feedback/comments/suggestions would
be appreciated.
Today, a TCP or UDP socket can receive connections or datagrams from any FIB.
32 matches
Mail list logo
