[Redirected to -net]
On Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 10:45:26PM -0500, Alwyn Goodloe wrote:
>
> This is my last fragmentation question I swear :-)
>
> When diverting udp packets which are larger than MTU(1500) ipfw seems to
> divert the first and reject the second.
> Here is tcpdump of the packet
Roman Le Houelleur wrote:
>
> hi,
>
> I use FreeBSD 4.2 stable + bridge + dummynet + ipfw.
> I would like to calculate the bandwidth of each
> authorized IP source flowing through the bridge from a
> user program.
> As this bandwidth calculation should be done very often
> (10 to 20 times per
Try to use IP Accountoing Daemon: http://www.simon.org.ua/ipa/
You also can install it from ports, but on its web site version 1.0.3 is
availble.
Clemens Hermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Hi,
>
> are there any recommandationions how to get
>are there any recommandationions how to get IP-accounting to work on
>FreeBSD? I have switched from ipf to ipfw so now I need a new way do
>keep track of the IP-traffic passing my machine.
>I have a machine with 30 IP-aliases.
>The least thing I need is monthly summary of the full amount of
>IP-
Hello,
it seems like there is a problem with node reference counts. I have a
test program, that instantiates a chain of nodes like this:
ng_atm ---> ng_sscop --> ng_sscf -> ng_socket
| ^
Ruslan Ermilov writes:
> I think I have found a bug here. When the ``divert foo ... udp ...'' rule
> has no destination port specification, everything works as documented, i.e.
> all fragments are reassembled and get diverted to the divert(4) to port
> ``foo''. If I add the destination port spec
On Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 09:44:07AM -0800, Archie Cobbs wrote:
> Ruslan Ermilov writes:
> > I think I have found a bug here. When the ``divert foo ... udp ...'' rule
> > has no destination port specification, everything works as documented, i.e.
> > all fragments are reassembled and get diverted t
> > Moreover, concerning the bridge, I was wondering if
> > there is a way not to put a third interface in promiscous
> > mode. As this third nic exists only for management purposes
> > I don't want it to participate to the bridge in any way.
Use the ng_bridge node if you want to have precise c
> Use the ng_bridge node if you want to have precise control over which
interfaces are being bridged.
Another thing, be careful when you enable the netgraph node when you have
BRIDGE compiled into your kernel.
2 reasons:
1) if you have the bridging code activated you'll get broadcast loops
> There's one downside though. You can get statistics from the bridge node on
> packets and octects passed through the different parts of the bridge
> setyup, but it's not IP based. Also using that bridging code there's no
> bandwidth throttling or IPFW rule matching yet.
>
> Vitaly Belekhov w
1) Is anyone working on the bridging code? I'm going to extend the
ng_bridge node with Spanning Tree Protocol and I wouldn't want to be
duplicating work. I checked in -current, but I thought I'd check on -net as
well. (And -arch because of my next question)
2) Where does one draw the line at h
> 1) Is anyone working on the bridging code? I'm going to extend the
> ng_bridge node with Spanning Tree Protocol and I wouldn't want to be
> duplicating work. I checked in -current, but I thought I'd check on -net as
> well. (And -arch because of my next question)
i am doing some minor fixes
Hi:
Does anyone know if there currently is a working implementation of 802.3AD
link aggregation that works on FreeBSD 4.2 with bridging?
Thanks,
Bernie
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
Hi, I cvsup'ed my traffic shaper box today (RELENG_4) [incorporating
Luigi's latest fixes]. So far, I have not been experiencing any stalls.
However, the output of dmesg seems to be corrupted. I see only 1 line
everytime I invoke it
%dmesg
>ipfw: 400 Pipe 1 TCP a.b.c.d:port e.f.g.h:port in via
%
are you sure you made a proper upgrade of header files and binaries ?
i have not seen the problem locally, and i have been running a
shaping bridge with the new code for most of the week.
cheers
luigi
> Hi, I cvsup'ed my traffic shaper box today (RELENG_4) [incorporating
> Luigi'
Firstly, thanks for the report.
And thanks for spending the time to look into it.
Can you tell me wheher this is a very new -current, or an earlier one..
(i.e. did I f*ck up in my latest changes, or might I already have fixed this :-)
what version number of ng_base.c is this? (I just recently ma
16 matches
Mail list logo
