Mohan Srinivasan wrote:
Hi,
The srvrcp_errs are very likely unrelated to the hangs.
nfs_rephead() is called (via the contorted macros nfsm_reply() and
friends) from the NFS server routines in nfs_serv.c. The error
that was returned by the vnode op called is passed into
nfs_rephead(), whence it ge
Synopsis: [patch] [net/route.h] recursive locking in the network stack
Responsible-Changed-From-To: freebsd-net->[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Responsible-Changed-By: gnn
Responsible-Changed-When: Wed May 11 14:42:34 GMT 2005
Responsible-Changed-Why:
Taking this to try to fix it.
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/
> > Are you using NFS/TCP ? Can you force the mount to NFS/UDP ?
>
> Yes, we use TCP. It is strongly recommended for multispeed networks and
> we did have problems with retransmissions using UDP.
I'm not disputing the merits of NFS/TCP. I suggested this merely as
a workaround, and to see if the
On Sat, May 7, 2005 12:37 am, Kris Kennaway said:
> On Fri, May 06, 2005 at 08:59:50AM +0200, Marian Durkovic wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>>
>>
>> seems we've found the problem. The performance degradation was
>> happening it the TX path, due to insufficient setting of TX packet
>> buffer FIFO on the ch
I've recently been experiencing a panic that has quickly grown
beyond my capabilities to debug. Any help is greatly appreciated.
Please see:
http://www.dis.com/freebsd.1.html
--
Mark Klein
PGP Key Available
www.dis.com
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mail
On Wed, May 11, 2005 5:24 pm, Mike Jakubik said:
> Any luck submitting the patch for this? I looked at Intels website, and
> the latest drive for FreeBSD 4.7 is 1.7.35. Which is what is also used on
> -CURRENT now. They also state "Development is no longer taking place on
> this driver. For the la
Hi Folks,
A few of us chatted about FAST_IPSEC at BSDCan today and came up with
the following task list that others might want to take a look at,
comment on, and maybe do some work on:
Tasks to update FAST_IPSec
Add IPv6 support (2-3 weeks)
Fix/update the compression code (< 1 week)
B
Forwarded to the kame folks as well as they might have already fixed
this in their own code.
Can you tell us what else is going on when this happens?
Is it random?
Thanks,
George
--- Begin Message ---
I've recently been experiencing a panic that has quickly grown
beyond my capabilities to debu
> I has been installed L2TP/IPSec + Racoon on fBSD 5.3. It works perfect but
> there are some things, which i want to resolve.
>
> 1. I`m using for authentification of clients shared_key. But it has some
> disadvantages. Clients are "road warrior" and it means, that i can`t know
> their IP in adva
On Sun, 8 May 2005, Suleiman Souhlal wrote:
The patch at http://people.freebsd.org/~ssouhlal/testing/
ip_reass-20050507.diff does just this.
Could you kindly test it?
Bye,
--
Suleiman Souhlal | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Your patch looks like it would defeat newdawn4, but it's not general
enough to o
Hello all, and thanks for your input.
I was able to send packets using libnet, and i could
confirm that the messages were propperly sent using
tcpdump... Now I needed to read the packets from
another node, so I tried libpcap... then the problem
arised. It would wait for ages, even after I sent a
Uhmm...
About my previous message, I think that the problem is
that i'm using a switch, where I thought I had a
hub... If I'm sending ethernet broadcast packets...
will they be forwarded to all the ports of a switch??
Probably the answer is No, and that's why I'm getting
that behaviour
Thank yo
Daniel Valencia wrote:
[ ...pcap delays... ]
Has anyone in this list had any experience with
libpcap over fbsd that can point me into the right
direction?
Sure. Are you trying to use non-blocking mode of PCAP by any chance? I found
that to be fairly busted on FreeBSD and would drop lots of packe
Daniel Valencia wrote:
About my previous message, I think that the problem is
that i'm using a switch, where I thought I had a
hub... If I'm sending ethernet broadcast packets...
will they be forwarded to all the ports of a switch??
Broadcast packets will go to all the ports on a switch. They'd ha
Hi,
I'd like to volunteer for
>
> Tasks to update FAST_IPSec
> Add IPv6 support (2-3 weeks)
>
unless someone else has already claimed ownership.
I can also help out on the racoon side so feel
free to put my name down on that list.
Thanks,
-- Qing
__
> On Wed, 11 May 2005 15:21:49 -0700,
> "Mark Klein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> I've recently been experiencing a panic that has quickly grown
> beyond my capabilities to debug. Any help is greatly appreciated.
> Please see:
> http://www.dis.com/freebsd.1.html
I cannot reach the web s
On Thu, 12 May 2005, Qing Li wrote:
Hi,
> I'd like to volunteer for
>
> >
> > Tasks to update FAST_IPSec
> > Add IPv6 support (2-3 weeks)
> >
>
> unless someone else has already claimed ownership.
>
> I can also help out on the racoon side so feel
> free to put my name down on that list.
>
> from skipping through racoon-ml from time to time I think racoon got
> announced as 0xdead project and one should switch to ipsec-tools?
>
Right, I also read the announcement on the racoon ml on 4/21.
I'm assuming George was referring to updating racoon in ports
to a later version. Af
At Thu, 12 May 2005 05:25:24 + (UTC),
Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
>
> On Thu, 12 May 2005, Qing Li wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> > I'd like to volunteer for
> >
> > >
> > > Tasks to update FAST_IPSec
> > > Add IPv6 support (2-3 weeks)
> > >
> >
> > unless someone else has already claimed ownership.
> >
At Thu, 12 May 2005 12:49:30 +0900,
jinmei wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 11 May 2005 15:21:49 -0700,
> > "Mark Klein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> > I've recently been experiencing a panic that has quickly grown
> > beyond my capabilities to debug. Any help is greatly appreciated.
>
> > Please
At Thu, 12 May 2005 05:43:22 +,
Qing Li wrote:
>
>
> >
> > from skipping through racoon-ml from time to time I think racoon got
> > announced as 0xdead project and one should switch to ipsec-tools?
> >
>
> Right, I also read the announcement on the racoon ml on 4/21.
> I'm assuming Geo
>
> No, it was an off the cuff comment during the discussion. We should,
> most likely, move to whatever is most current as our solution.
>
I see. I guess the decision also depends on how much others are
willing to make that switch.
Either way, you can count me in as a helper if you li
Hi,
I have upgraded a vpn server from FreeBSD 4.11 to 5.4-RELEASE.
The box as about 20 vpn connections to other FreeBSD machines,
the physical connection is via tun0 ... tun20 devices.
Traffic flow is something like this:
my internal net ->
vpn server em1 ->
vpn server ipsec ->
23 matches
Mail list logo
