Re: trunk interface (was (no subject))

2006-05-19 Thread Thomas
Am Donnerstag, den 18.05.2006, 18:05 -0700 schrieb Julian Elischer: > Thomas Vogt wrote: > > > Hi > > > > Thanks. I know about the netgraph ether/fec interfaces. But I thought > > about a solution without netgraph. AFAIK Netgraph implies overhead > > and ng_ehter is more complicated to set up.

Re: Can't delete route

2006-05-19 Thread Brian Candler
On Thu, May 18, 2006 at 02:52:19PM -0300, Alexandre Biancalana wrote: > > > # route add 128.110.0.0 255.255.0.0 10.0.0.17 > > > add net 128.110.0.0: gateway 255.255.0.0 ... > > >Running netstat -nr I get the following: > > > > > > 0&0xa11255.255.0.0UGSc 15 332

[SOLVED] Can't delete route

2006-05-19 Thread Alexandre Biancalana
Brian Candler wrote: On Thu, May 18, 2006 at 02:52:19PM -0300, Alexandre Biancalana wrote: # route add 128.110.0.0 255.255.0.0 10.0.0.17 add net 128.110.0.0: gateway 255.255.0.0 ... Running netstat -nr I get the following: 0&0xa11255.255.0.0UGSc 1

improving transport over lossy links ?

2006-05-19 Thread Mike Tancsa
I am looking for a way to improve the reliability of a lossy link (dialup from remote sites). I am going to try multilink PPP but was wondering if something like ng_one2many might work as well ? Does anyone have any suggestions for avenues to explore ? For multilink ppp, does mpd offer any

Re: improving transport over lossy links ?

2006-05-19 Thread Ian Smith
On Fri, 19 May 2006 at 11:06:48 -0400, Mike Tancsa wrote: > I am looking for a way to improve the reliability of a lossy link > (dialup from remote sites). I am going to try multilink PPP but was > wondering if something like ng_one2many might work as well ? Does > anyone have any suggesti

Re: improving transport over lossy links ?

2006-05-19 Thread Mike Tancsa
At 12:06 PM 19/05/2006, Ian Smith wrote: Assuming that V.42 error correction is working properly - forced if need be - there shouldn't =be= any data loss, however slow getting through, this side of protocol timeouts of course. I can't guess your mystery application, but often slower connections

Re: improving transport over lossy links ?

2006-05-19 Thread Julian Elischer
Ian Smith wrote: On Fri, 19 May 2006 at 11:06:48 -0400, Mike Tancsa wrote: > I am looking for a way to improve the reliability of a lossy link > (dialup from remote sites). I am going to try multilink PPP but was > wondering if something like ng_one2many might work as well ? Does > anyone h

Re: improving transport over lossy links ?

2006-05-19 Thread Chuck Swiger
Julian Elischer wrote: Ian Smith wrote: On Fri, 19 May 2006 at 11:06:48 -0400, Mike Tancsa wrote: I am looking for a way to improve the reliability of a lossy link (dialup from remote sites). I am going to try multilink PPP but was wondering if something like ng_one2many might work as well

Re: improving transport over lossy links ?

2006-05-19 Thread Mike Tancsa
At 03:32 PM 19/05/2006, Chuck Swiger wrote: Agreed. If you can live with doing so, using an MTU of around 512 worked pretty well back in the days that I was using a 19200 baud DOV (data over voice modem) that tended to experience line noise & hence packet drops when you got an incoming voice

Re: improving transport over lossy links ?

2006-05-19 Thread Ian Smith
On Fri, 19 May 2006 at 12:38:31 -0400, Mike Tancsa wrote: > At 12:06 PM 19/05/2006, Ian Smith wrote: > > >Assuming that V.42 error correction is working properly - forced if need > >be - there shouldn't =be= any data loss, however slow getting through, > >this side of protocol timeouts of co

Re: trunk interface (was (no subject))

2006-05-19 Thread Julian Elischer
Thomas wrote: Am Donnerstag, den 18.05.2006, 18:05 -0700 schrieb Julian Elischer: Thomas Vogt wrote: Hi Thanks. I know about the netgraph ether/fec interfaces. But I thought about a solution without netgraph. AFAIK Netgraph implies overhead and ng_ehter is more complicated to set