I remember a thread a few weeks ago about this. I thought it had to do with
flow control from certain switches. There was even a patch. I might not be
remembering it properly, but have a look through the archives for fxp flow
control and you will probably find it. Like I said, I am just going fr
On Wed, Mar 07, 2001 at 10:47:06AM -0500, Louis A. Mamakos wrote:
>
> > To be CONSERVATIVE, the implementation MUST NOT transmit all-zero
> > computed TCP checksum as all-ones; while they are certainly equivalent
> > in one's complement arithmetics, but RFC 793 does not grant us to do
> > this co
Satyajeet Seth wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> Please see my comments below.
>
>
> I am using FreeBSD 4.1. I followed Roger's suggestion about "autosrc 0"
> message. But "autosrc" message is not available in ng_ether.
> I have tried commenting
> bcopy((IFP2AC(priv->ifp))->ac_enaddr, eh->ether_shost,
> 6);
Okay, I feel stupid...
I've got a 4.2 Release box set up as a firewall with some clients behind it.
I'm using my BSD box as PPPoE client. My problem is the "win clients can't
get to certain web sites" issue, I've verified by sending large ping packet
from outside and it gets lost between tun0 an
My bug report against the current POSIX draft was accepted. For the
record, here are the changes being made. (``The indicated line'' is
referring to a line in the definition of gethostname() where the
length of the buffer was previously defined to be 256, including the
terminating null. The exc
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Greetings,
I searched the FreeBSD mailing lists for this issue and turned up a
few hits, but no solid answers, so I thought that I would pose the
question here -
I have an Alcatel SpeedTouch USB DSL modem at home, and wanted to
hook it up to my Fr
If you upgrade to the latest version of ppp(8) (you can get an
archive from http://www.Awfulhak.org/ppp.html) the problem should go
away. ppp(8) now fixes this stuff itself (look for mssfixup in the
man page).
> Okay, I feel stupid...
>
> I've got a 4.2 Release box set up as a firewall with
Just some ramblings
I find this a bit odd. I concluded recently that NAME_MAX was the
odd-one-out WRT not having the NUL only because it is the maximum
size of a *component* of a path. When the value is used, it makes
sense to talk in terms of the without-NUL value.
This change seems to
< said:
> This change seems to make it even more likely that people will forget
> whether MUMBLE_MAX includes the NUL or not.
I chose to conform to the definition of {NAME_MAX} because it was the
one I was staring at when I wrote the aardvark. I could just as
easily have used {LOGIN_NAME_MAX}
On a similar note, how stable is the PPPoE in RELENG_4? This would be
useful to know if I ever decide to drop my cable for DSL.
On Mon, Mar 12, 2001 at 12:10:52PM -0600, Paul Armor wrote:
> Okay, I feel stupid...
>
> I've got a 4.2 Release box set up as a firewall with some clients behind it.
>
On 12 Mar 2001 21:39:31 -0500, in sentex.lists.freebsd.net you wrote:
>On a similar note, how stable is the PPPoE in RELENG_4? This would be
>useful to know if I ever decide to drop my cable for DSL.
Very. I am an admin at an ISP, and betweem the various PPPoE
implementations on win32 (Enternet,
I set up a PPPoE firewall with Windows clients on the backside for an office
32 days ago (with help from the folks here and some other links, thanks) and
so far it has only had 1 reconnect. Thats a lot better than our offices that
use Cable connections. Since it is a remote office I also set it up
Hello Julian,
Tuesday, March 13, 2001, 12:18:49 AM, you wrote:
JE> Jonathan Lemon wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 12, 2001 at 02:12:56PM +0800, David Xu wrote:
>> > Hello Jonathan,
>> >
>> > Friday, March 02, 2001, 6:11:14 AM, you wrote:
>> >
>> > JL> jlemon 2001/03/01 14:11:14 PST
>> >
>> > JL>
On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, David Xu wrote:
> Hello Julian,
>
> JE> Msoft w98 and on use SAC
>
> sigh, does it mean FreeBSD get behind in some TCP/IP features?
> I know Linux and OpenBSD support SACK, and possible NetBSD.
yes, three are several SACK implementations for FreeBSD but none has been
ad
On Mon, Mar 12, 2001 at 08:38:56PM -0600, Andrew Hesford wrote:
> On a similar note, how stable is the PPPoE in RELENG_4? This would be
> useful to know if I ever decide to drop my cable for DSL.
Rock stable. I've been using PPPoE since March 2k and haven't had any
PPPoE-related problems that wer
* David Xu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010312 21:39] wrote:
> Hello Julian,
>
> Tuesday, March 13, 2001, 12:18:49 AM, you wrote:
>
> JE> Jonathan Lemon wrote:
> >>
> >> On Mon, Mar 12, 2001 at 02:12:56PM +0800, David Xu wrote:
> >> > Hello Jonathan,
> >> >
> >> > Friday, March 02, 2001, 6:11:14 AM, yo
This lng email will hopefully allow the netgraph - network gurus to
A: answer my remaining questions
and
B: grab this and make a tutorial 'worked example' (unless it is total blech
of course)
So to those who have already earned their stripes from one looking for his
first
(hopefully, not to
17 matches
Mail list logo
