Re: a very strange netstat output and problem when using transparent proxy

2006/11/7, Marat N.Afanasyev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Oliver Fromme wrote: > Marat N.Afanasyev wrote: > > bge0: flags=8843 mtu 1500 > > Ok, I also have a machine with bge(4) NIC within reach. > I've had a look at it for similar symptoms (see below). > > > bge0 1500 00:50:45:5f:4f:78 23410

New wpi driver

Hi all, I'm pleased to tell you i got the latest wpi driver from Damien Bergamini to work properly on a latest -stable on an Acer laptop. Some history: I didn't do anything special, only report some problems on the [EMAIL PROTECTED] about this new driver on the recently 4.0 release and Damien wa

Re: [patch] tun(4) and tap(4) if_clone support.

Landon Fuller wrote: Nick Barkas ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) and I have added interface cloning support to the tun(4) and tap(4) drivers. We maintained backwards-compatible support for devfs cloning, which is now disabled by default -- it can be re-enabled via a sysctl. Interfaces that are created vi

Re: Posting restrictions on this mailing list (for spam control)?

MQ wrote: [snip] > The mailing list denied all the mail from my previous mail box provided by > Netease(NASDAQ: NTES) from China mainland, even I subscribed to -net, and > asked me to wait the moderator's approval. But after I changed my > mailbox to > gmail, the filter never returned such message

Re: mpd4 on sparc64 problem (maybe netgraph involved)

Volodymyr Kostyrko wrote: I have a host machine (i386) with many i386 clients and one sparc64 all configured the same way. All i386 client work just fine, while sparc64 one refuses to do so. There is a bug in LCP negotiation in mpd4_0b5 on 64bit big-endian platforms like sparc64. I have commit

Proposed 6.2 em RELEASE patch

This patch is an evolution of the last one I sent out. It has a couple of minor corrections, like a bad forward decl in the header. The last patch has had quite a bit of testing and all reports have been positive. The only complaint was from Gleb who says he needs to keep his beloved infinite fo

Re: Proposed 6.2 em RELEASE patch

Without introduced this new patch, can I still use sysctl to maximise its performance like FAST_INTR? S On 11/9/06, Jack Vogel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: This patch is an evolution of the last one I sent out. It has a couple of minor corrections, like a bad forward decl in the header. The las

Re: Proposed 6.2 em RELEASE patch

On 11/8/06, Sam Wun <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Without introduced this new patch, can I still use sysctl to maximise its performance like FAST_INTR? S Not sure if I'm understanding you, but let me try. You cannot attain the same receive performance without the patch. When I use SmartBits and