RE: Two ISP connections

** Reply to note from Don Bowman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Wed, 10 Dec 2003 20:00:10 -0500 > see the lft port (layer 4 traceroute) http://www.mainnerve.com/lft/ Thanks. > [you can't really block icmp would fragment Let's say "you shouln't really". > it would break PMTU]. Is this what you are

Re: Two ISP connections

** Reply to note from Barney Wolff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Wed, 10 Dec 2003 20:39:28 -0500 > Things started from /usr/local/etc/rc.d get a hup signal when rc is finished > with all the startup scripts - I think. Anyway, if you don't use nohup, > or a more-conventional way to daemonize what you've

incorrect connect() behavior

Dear sirs, as it is described in connect(2): ERRORS The connect() call fails if: ... [ENETUNREACH] The network is not reachable from this host. [EHOSTUNREACH] The remote host is not reachable from this host. However, this sample program (attached) shows that conn

ANNOUNCE: net/tcpdump Radiotap-aware port committed.

All, I've just committed a new port of tcpdump 3.8.1 with David Young's radiotap patches. On FreeBSD 5.2 I was able to get the radiotap headers from the wi(4) driver with this. This is fairly bleeding edge so there may be rough edges around it, play with it and let me know how you get on. The mai

Re: ANNOUNCE: net/tcpdump Radiotap-aware port committed.

Bruce M Simpson wrote: The main motivation for committing the port was to bring in features like this without disrupting the vendor branch of tcpdump/libpcap in the FreeBSD base system. Is there a port of libpcap? The system tcpdump seems to be out of synch with libpcap already since tcpdump h

Re: ANNOUNCE: net/tcpdump Radiotap-aware port committed.

Petri Helenius wrote: Is there a port of libpcap? The system tcpdump seems to be out of synch with libpcap already since tcpdump has been imported once after last libpcap import. And as said before, libpcap in the system contains the bug which severely limits it´s usefulness in larger bandwidth

Re: Two ISP connections

On Thu, Dec 11, 2003 at 01:51:20PM -0500, Andrea Venturoli wrote: > ** Reply to note from Barney Wolff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Wed, 10 Dec 2003 20:39:28 > -0500 > > > > Things started from /usr/local/etc/rc.d get a hup signal when rc is finished > > with all the startup scripts - I think. Anyway,

grouping 2 or more interfaces as 1

Hello, I am freebsd newbie, so bear with me. I was searching if its possible to bond 2 ethernet interfaces as 1 under FreeBsd. Ie similiar to creating a trunk. Any references? Thanks, -Hussain ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.

RE: grouping 2 or more interfaces as 1

Look into bridge(4). > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Hussain Ali > Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2003 2:59 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: grouping 2 or more interfaces as 1 > > > > Hello, > > I am freebsd newbie, so bear with m

RE: grouping 2 or more interfaces as 1

On Thu, 11 Dec 2003, kfl wrote: > Look into bridge(4). more likely he wants something like ng_fec or ng_one2many > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Hussain Ali > > Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2003 2:59 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTE

Re: grouping 2 or more interfaces as 1

There are couple modules: ng_one2many, there is a man page for it; ng_fec - no man page, but here are some info: http://www.bsd-dk.dk/archives/2001/Mar/0027.html http://www.securityfocus.com/archive/96/340308/2003-09-29/2003-10-05/0 --- Hussain Ali <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hello, > > I am

Re: grouping 2 or more interfaces as 1

Julian Elischer wrote: On Thu, 11 Dec 2003, kfl wrote: Look into bridge(4). more likely he wants something like ng_fec or ng_one2many Unless performance is the reason for bonding the ether channels... Can't we steal the Linux code? ;-) ___ [EMAIL PR

Re: grouping 2 or more interfaces as 1

Julian Elischer wrote: more likely he wants something like ng_fec or ng_one2many Unless performance is the reason for bonding the ether channels... Can't we steal the Linux code? ;-) is the netgraph version particularly slow? Not slower than a single ether channel, no ;-) Considerably slower tha

Re: grouping 2 or more interfaces as 1

On Thu, 11 Dec 2003, Michael Sierchio wrote: > Julian Elischer wrote: > > > > On Thu, 11 Dec 2003, kfl wrote: > > > > > >>Look into bridge(4). > > > > > > more likely he wants something like ng_fec or ng_one2many > > Unless performance is the reason for bonding the ether channels... > > C

ssh tunnels and Xvnc - (yes, I know... What? not again!?)

Hi all, I have a situation that has not been fully addressed by the excellent documentation on getting ssh tunnels and remote X-windows display managers (like VNC) running. And my feeble brain is too damaged by the dreaded lurgy to make heads or tails of it. home machine (home) ISP --- in

Re: ANNOUNCE: net/tcpdump Radiotap-aware port committed.

What are the chances of Phil Wood's patches getting ported? If you mean the patches from http://public.lanl.gov/cpw/ then the chances are no greater than the chances of memory mapping being added to BPF. :-) I.e., the patches support use of Linux's memory-mapped PF_PACKET socket support; ther

Controlling ports used by natd

Is there a way to control the range of ports to which FreeBSD's natd maps outgoing connections? I'm attempting to deal with a situation in which natd is (sometimes) changing outgoing UDP packets' source port numbers to ones which are commonly used by worms. Sometimes, a firewall at the destinatio