Weiguang Shi wrote:
nc might be waiting on all the interfaces; enumerating MTUs and choosing the
largest
sounds complicated, especially when some interfaces can be configured to receive
jumbo frames. Why not just use something like 64KB as the other user
suggested or something even larger?
From: Bruce M. Simpson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Weiguang Shi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2007 12:15:34 AM
Subject: Re: nc captures 1024 bytes
Looks like a netcat bug, if it doesn't tune buffers to the interface MTU.
I'm no
Looks like a netcat bug, if it doesn't tune buffers to the interface MTU.
I'm not sure if nc has a 'de facto' maintainer however I believe it is
something which was recently imported into the freebsd base system.
Still, it is better to try to field patches with the upstream maintainer
before
;
> 636 int plen;
> 637
> 638 plen = jflag ? 8192 : 1024;
> 639
>
> - Original Message
> From: Weiguang Shi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
> Sent: Monday, August 27, 2007 4:05:26 PM
> Subject: nc captures 1024 bytes
&g
en = jflag ? 8192 : 1024;
639
- Original Message
From: Weiguang Shi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Sent: Monday, August 27, 2007 4:05:26 PM
Subject: nc captures 1024 bytes
Hi,
My system is FreeBSD 6.2. I sent a UDP datagram of 1464 bytes to port
1234 wher
Hi,
My system is FreeBSD 6.2. I sent a UDP datagram of 1464 bytes to port
1234 where nc was waiting
% nc -n -u -l 1234 >tt
Afterwards, the size of tt, however, was only 1024 bytes.
I noticed this piece of code in nc
341 if (uflag) {
342
