On Tue, Dec 18, 2001 at 10:04:06PM +0200, Nimrod Mesika wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 18, 2001 at 11:14:26AM +0200, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
> > > http://www.x-itec.de/projects/tuts/ipsec-howto.txt
> > > FreeBSD ipsec mini-howto
> > >
> > Now that you mention it.
> >
> > Why this document states that we nee
Hello,
> I believe you can bridge a vlan interface if you use the new upcoming
> netgraph vlan node. It shuold be committed soon. (Vlans done the way
> it should have been done ;-)
Is it possible that this one will fix my FEC and VLAN problems? Is there a
patch for -STABLE out there? I would be g
it is being donated by a french fellow.
He is just polishing it.
I will try commit it in the next few days.
On Thu, 20 Dec 2001, Attila Nagy wrote:
> Hello,
>
> > I believe you can bridge a vlan interface if you use the new upcoming
> > netgraph vlan node. It shuold be committed soon. (Vlans do
Hello,
> it is being donated by a french fellow. He is just polishing it. I
> will try commit it in the next few days.
Great, thanks!
--
Attila Nagye-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Budapest Poly
Hi, Similar to what Ceri describes in this message
http://docs.freebsd.org/cgi/getmsg.cgi?fetch=508422+0+current/freebsd-stable
I have observed a 4.4-stable box panicing whenever bridging is turned
on. This was cvsup'ed today morning. I have other boxes cvsup'ed at
the same time except that they
On Wed, Dec 19, 2001 at 06:21:39PM +, Josef Karthauser wrote:
> Hi Ruslan,
>
> You've been near this code recently. Do you have any suggestions for
> how this may work?
>
This would require a new SIOCCIFDATA ioctl in group 'i'.
> On Tue, Dec 11, 2001 at 12:35:04PM +0800, Yusuf Goolamabbas
H I thought it was just me, and I hadn't had a chance yet to go
digging. I just enabled OPTIONS = BRIDGE in the kernel and I was getting
spontaneous reboots, but they pointed to NATD blowing up. Essentially
the same error though. Removing OPTIONS = BRIDGE seems to have stopped
the reboots.
>From what I have learned (textbooks etc.), the size of TCP/IP headers do
not change often. I wonder then how often they do change in a system
running a webserver. Or is there a sysctl variable that reports such
things? Thanks.
John
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscr
I am trying to modify ip_fw.c in the /usr/src/sys/netinet, I tried to add a
socket call in the code, it can be compiled, but when it runs into the code,
it just crashed. It gave me the "Fatal trap error 12", Memory address is
wrong.
Can any one tell me if socket call can be used in kernel level?
You cannot do a socket directly but you can indirectly
tell me what you are trying to do and I can help..
On Thu, 20 Dec 2001, Henry Su wrote:
> I am trying to modify ip_fw.c in the /usr/src/sys/netinet, I tried to add a
> socket call in the code, it can be compiled, but when it runs into the
I wonder if this isn't related to some change in the handling of
interface lists, routes or arp entries. I do not recall any recent
change in the dummynet/bridge code that might cause this.
On passing. the line ${fwcmd} add 400 pass udp from 0.0.0.0 2054 to 0.0.0.0
has not been supported for a lo
* Henry Su <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [011220 14:56] wrote:
> I am trying to modify ip_fw.c in the /usr/src/sys/netinet, I tried to add a
> socket call in the code, it can be compiled, but when it runs into the code,
> it just crashed. It gave me the "Fatal trap error 12", Memory address is
> wrong.
>
>
Hmm
For some reason, I cannot seem to get the proxy arp portion of PPTP to work:
[pptp] exec: /sbin/ifconfig ng0 10.1.1.79 10.1.1.80 netmask
0x -link0
[pptp] exec: /usr/sbin/arp -s 10.1.1.80 0:4f:49:9:bc:b9 pub
manually running arp yields:
arp -s 10.1.1.2 00:01:2e:00:1f:f2 pub
cannot i
Thanks, Julian and Alfred.
I am trying to redirect the denied http request to a default web site. So my
idea is in the "ip_fw_chk" function of ip_fw.c, add following code, when it
will drop the packet. But as you pointed out in earlier email, socket can
not be used in this case. Do u have any oth
programming in the kernel is not the same as outside the kernel.
you can't use read(), open() write(), etc. in the same way,
even if the functions exist.. (they have different args and require
certain in kernel state.)
socket can DEFINITLY not be used..
As I mentioned.. use a ipfw fwd rule instea
I have two answers:
1/ Use ipfw add NNN fwd localhost,8001 [deny criteria]
to make the packet that is denied go to a default server listenning on
port 8001
2/ there is an in-kernel webserver built using netgraph but it's not
public, but you can definitly use the 'ksocket' node to open 'in k
Hi ,
I'm trying to write some driver code for a memory mapped device (PCI bus).
struct xxx_softc *sc = device_get_softc(dev);
struct resource *res;
/*
* Map control/status registers.
*/
command = pci_read_config(dev, PCIR_COMMAND, 4);
command |= (PCIM_CMD_MEM
Really? Its still part of the default rc.firewall that's being
distributed and I haven't seen it mentioned anywhere the its been
deprecated.
-Original Message-
From: Luigi Rizzo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2001 2:49 PM
To: Yusuf Goolamabbas
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED
> I wonder if this isn't related to some change in the handling of
> interface lists, routes or arp entries. I do not recall any recent
> change in the dummynet/bridge code that might cause this.
>
> On passing. the line ${fwcmd} add 400 pass udp from 0.0.0.0 2054 to 0.0.0.0
> has not been suppor
On Fri, Dec 21, 2001 at 12:02:15PM +0800, Yusuf Goolamabbas wrote:
> >
> > How repeatable is the problem ? It shouldn't be hard to track, it looks
> > like a null pointer dereference.
>
> 100% repeatable. The strange part is that the same rules including the
> ${fwcmd} add 400 pass udp from 0.0.
On Thu, Dec 20, 2001 at 11:08:14PM -0800, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 21, 2001 at 12:02:15PM +0800, Yusuf Goolamabbas wrote:
> > >
> > > How repeatable is the problem ? It shouldn't be hard to track, it looks
> > > like a null pointer dereference.
> >
> > 100% repeatable. The strange part i
21 matches
Mail list logo
