Bruce, good day!
Tue, Mar 06, 2007 at 04:00:10PM +, Bruce M. Simpson wrote:
> Eygene Ryabinkin wrote:
> >I am awfully sorry, but you're seem to be mistaken:
> Thanks for clarifying this. That'll be because I didn't read if_bridge that
> far. ;^) In my original message I was just looking at if
On Friday 09 March 2007 15:16, Antonio Tommasi wrote:
> Hi to all,
> i've this scenario:
>
> one machine in a private network
> one machine with a public machine
>
> i need to control with vnc the machine with private ip by the machine
> with public ip.
>
> This is possibile installing ultravnc
Rashid N. Achilov wrote:
TightVNC or TridiaVNC. But encryption and file transmission will not available
with these VNC's and UltraVNC at another end
JFYI:
I have heard corporate IT people who mostly work with Windows discuss
UltraVNC. I don't see a port for it. It is on SourceForge so per
Hi,
Eygene Ryabinkin wrote:
Speaking about vlan problems: the original problem is to do something
with VLAN interfaces only because they are sharing the MAC of their
physical parent. The problem itself is not VLAN-specific -- if there
will be two physical interfaces with the same MACs and they
Current FreeBSD problem reports
Critical problems
Serious problems
S Tracker Resp. Description
a kern/38554 netchanging interface ipaddress doesn't seem to work
s kern/39937 netipstealth
On Mon, Mar 12, 2007 at 09:36:43AM +, Bruce M. Simpson wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Eygene Ryabinkin wrote:
> >
> >Speaking about vlan problems: the original problem is to do something
> >with VLAN interfaces only because they are sharing the MAC of their
> >physical parent. The problem itself is not VLAN
Yar, good day.
Mon, Mar 12, 2007 at 02:20:56PM +0300, Yar Tikhiy wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 12, 2007 at 09:36:43AM +, Bruce M. Simpson wrote:
> > Eygene Ryabinkin wrote:
> > >
> > >Speaking about vlan problems: the original problem is to do something
> > >with VLAN interfaces only because they are s
Bruce,
Mon, Mar 12, 2007 at 09:36:43AM +, Bruce M. Simpson wrote:
>
> >Speaking about vlan problems: the original problem is to do something
> >with VLAN interfaces only because they are sharing the MAC of their
> >physical parent. The problem itself is not VLAN-specific -- if there
> >will be
Eygene Ryabinkin wrote:
[...]
We're not checking if the interface member is a VLAN interface. We just
do the generic checks for the incoming interface. rik@ will send the
patch today, at least he just promised me ;))
Here it is. I'll check it for compilation this evening and I hope Eygene
wil
Eygene Ryabinkin wrote:
This is a different point. The bridge wants to know about bridge
members MACs just because it should catch the packets that are
destined to the bridge members. It is the only way for an L2 thing
that is operating in the promiscious mode.
Correct.
For our case (when MA
Yar Tikhiy wrote:
Guys, excuse me, but I still fail to see how the case of VLANs'
sharing a single MAC differs from the case of several physical
interfaces with the same MAC from the POV of a bridge. A bridge
can have no own MAC addresses at all, it plays with foreign MAC
addresses only. Theref
Hi,
The ifnet manpage contains entries for the following routines which do
not exist in the ifnet struct.
The attached patch removes these entries.
if_done
if_poll_recv
if_poll_xmit
if_poll_inttrn
if_poll_slowinput
Thanks
Aniruddha
Index: ifnet.9
=
On Mon, Mar 12, 2007 at 01:26:13PM +, Bruce M. Simpson wrote:
> Yar Tikhiy wrote:
> >Guys, excuse me, but I still fail to see how the case of VLANs'
> >sharing a single MAC differs from the case of several physical
> >interfaces with the same MAC from the POV of a bridge. A bridge
> >can have
Yar,
> > 2. In the case where 802.3ad trunking is implemented, the same Ethernet
> > address may be used by multiple physical interfaces.
> >
> > 3. As Eygene explained well: there are a number of consumers of
> > Ethernet frames in the stack. As if_bridge may potentially be passed
> > mbuf c
Hi List,
I´m doing a firewall setup using 6-STABLE + PF with two internet links
but I can't do the route-to rule function as I need.
(default gw)__
Link A <---> |int A |
| |
Link B <---> |int B |
Alexandre Biancalana wrote:
Hi List,
I´m doing a firewall setup using 6-STABLE + PF with two internet links
but I can't do the route-to rule function as I need.
(default gw)__
Link A <---> |int A |
| |
Link B <--
On Mon, Mar 12, 2007 at 05:38:11PM +0300, Eygene Ryabinkin wrote:
> Yar,
>
> > > 2. In the case where 802.3ad trunking is implemented, the same Ethernet
> > > address may be used by multiple physical interfaces.
> > >
> > > 3. As Eygene explained well: there are a number of consumers of
> > >
Tom Judge wrote:
Alexandre Biancalana wrote:
Hi List,
I´m doing a firewall setup using 6-STABLE + PF with two internet
links but I can't do the route-to rule function as I need.
(default gw)__
Link A <---> |int A |
| |
Alexandre Biancalana wrote:
Tom Judge wrote:
Alexandre Biancalana wrote:
Hi List,
I´m doing a firewall setup using 6-STABLE + PF with two internet
links but I can't do the route-to rule function as I need.
(default gw)__
Link A <---> |int A |
Tom Judge wrote:
Alexandre Biancalana wrote:
Tom Judge wrote:
Alexandre Biancalana wrote:
Hi List,
I´m doing a firewall setup using 6-STABLE + PF with two internet
links but I can't do the route-to rule function as I need.
(default gw)__
Link A <---> |int A |
On Sun, Feb 25, 2007 at 04:15:37PM +, Bruce M Simpson wrote:
>
> Please try the attached patch which should hopefully fix this issue
> (untested).
I'm sorry to come up with bad news, but the patch resulted in a
different panic:
--
Yar
Kernel page fault with the following non-sleepable loc
Alexandre Biancalana wrote:
Tom Judge wrote:
Alexandre Biancalana wrote:
Tom Judge wrote:
Alexandre Biancalana wrote:
Hi List,
I´m doing a firewall setup using 6-STABLE + PF with two internet
links but I can't do the route-to rule function as I need.
(default gw)__
Lin
Tom Judge wrote:
Alexandre Biancalana wrote:
Tom Judge wrote:
Alexandre Biancalana wrote:
Tom Judge wrote:
Alexandre Biancalana wrote:
Hi List,
I´m doing a firewall setup using 6-STABLE + PF with two internet
links but I can't do the route-to rule function as I need.
(default
Alexandre Biancalana wrote:
Tom Judge wrote:
Alexandre Biancalana wrote:
Tom Judge wrote:
Alexandre Biancalana wrote:
Tom Judge wrote:
Alexandre Biancalana wrote:
Hi List,
I´m doing a firewall setup using 6-STABLE + PF with two internet
links but I can't do the route-to rule function as
Tom Judge wrote:
Alexandre Biancalana wrote:
Tom Judge wrote:
Alexandre Biancalana wrote:
Tom Judge wrote:
Alexandre Biancalana wrote:
Tom Judge wrote:
Alexandre Biancalana wrote:
Hi List,
I´m doing a firewall setup using 6-STABLE + PF with two internet
links but I can't do the route-to
Yar Tikhiy wrote:
On Mon, Mar 12, 2007 at 05:38:11PM +0300, Eygene Ryabinkin wrote:
Yar,
2. In the case where 802.3ad trunking is implemented, the same Ethernet
address may be used by multiple physical interfaces.
3. As Eygene explained well: there are a number of consumers of
Ethe
On Mon, Mar 12, 2007 at 11:51:02PM +0300, Roman Kurakin wrote:
> Yar Tikhiy wrote:
> >On Mon, Mar 12, 2007 at 05:38:11PM +0300, Eygene Ryabinkin wrote:
> >
> >>Yar,
> >>
> >>
> 2. In the case where 802.3ad trunking is implemented, the same Ethernet
> address may be used by multiple p
Just to be certain, are you aware that for PF, the last matching rule is
applied? Also, you can use the command:
# pfctl -vv -sr
to examine how your rules are being matched.
Cheers,
Han
Alexandre Biancalana wrote:
Hi List,
I´m doing a firewall setup using 6-STABLE + PF with two internet li
Tom Judge wrote:
Alexandre Biancalana wrote:
Tom Judge wrote:
Alexandre Biancalana wrote:
Tom Judge wrote:
Alexandre Biancalana wrote:
Tom Judge wrote:
Alexandre Biancalana wrote:
Hi List,
I´m doing a firewall setup using 6-STABLE + PF with two
internet links but I can't do the route-to
Alexandre Biancalana wrote:
Tom Judge wrote:
Alexandre Biancalana wrote:
Tom Judge wrote:
Alexandre Biancalana wrote:
Tom Judge wrote:
Alexandre Biancalana wrote:
Tom Judge wrote:
Alexandre Biancalana wrote:
Hi List,
I´m doing a firewall setup using 6-STABLE + PF with two
internet link
Tom Judge wrote:
Alexandre Biancalana wrote:
Tom Judge wrote:
Alexandre Biancalana wrote:
Tom Judge wrote:
Alexandre Biancalana wrote:
Tom Judge wrote:
Alexandre Biancalana wrote:
Tom Judge wrote:
Alexandre Biancalana wrote:
Hi List,
I´m doing a firewall setup using 6-STABLE + PF with
Yar, good day.
> > >>Probably because if_bridge is written for Ethernet, 802.11 and
> > >>may be some other 802 interfaces:
> > >>-
> > >>DESCRIPTION
> > >> The if_bridge driver creates a logical link between two or more IEEE
> > >> 802
> > >> networks that use the same (or ``simi
On Sat, Mar 10, 2007 at 06:35:34PM +0300, Yar Tikhiy wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> Just noticed that neither ipfw(8) nor /etc/rc.d/ipfw cares to load
> dummynet.ko. It can result in a broken setup when one migrates
> from a custom monolithic kernel to GENERIC with modules, which is
> a nice way to reduc
33 matches
Mail list logo
