Re: Port of the new em(4) to RELENG_6 and some problems with 82540EM

2007-05-17 Thread Eygene Ryabinkin
Jack, Thu, May 17, 2007 at 12:02:11AM -0700, Jack Vogel wrote: > This driver CAME from a 6.X base that is thoroughly tested > here at Intel, so while I appreciate your efforts, they are > unnecessary. When the time comes to MFC I will handle it. OK, sorry for the noise. -- Eygene ___

Re: Port of the new em(4) to RELENG_6 and some problems with 82540EM

2007-05-17 Thread Jack Vogel
This driver CAME from a 6.X base that is thoroughly tested here at Intel, so while I appreciate your efforts, they are unnecessary. When the time comes to MFC I will handle it. Regards, Jack On 5/16/07, Eygene Ryabinkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Jack, good day. I happened to make a quick an

Re: EM and TSO

2007-05-17 Thread Danny Braniss
> On 5/16/07, Thomas Hurst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > * Jack Vogel ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > > > > I introduced a change yesterday that limited TSO to PCI Express > > > adapters, I did this more for avoidance rather than a bug fix, and > > > I'm not 100% sure its the right thing, so I t

Re: EM and TSO

2007-05-17 Thread Jack Vogel
On 5/17/07, Danny Braniss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 5/16/07, Thomas Hurst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > * Jack Vogel ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > > > > I introduced a change yesterday that limited TSO to PCI Express > > > adapters, I did this more for avoidance rather than a bug fix, a

Re: Port of the new em(4) to RELENG_6 and some problems with 82540EM

2007-05-17 Thread Sten Daniel Soersdal
Eygene Ryabinkin wrote: Jack, good day. I happened to make a quick and dirty patch for your latest (for the 16.05.2007) em(4) driver from 7-CURRENT. I had seen that you mentioned TSO and 6.3, so I assume that you're going to merge the driver to the RELENG_6 someday, so maybe my effort may be hel

Re: Merging rc.d/network_ipv6 into rc.d/netif

2007-05-17 Thread Mike Makonnen
On Thu, Apr 05, 2007 at 11:02:51AM -0500, Brooks Davis wrote: > > > > > > I fell fairly strongly that ipv6_network_interfaces and > > > network_interfaces are a mistake and that we should remove them > > > rather than propagating them. The way I'd prefer to see interfaces > > > that are exception

Re: Port of the new em(4) to RELENG_6 and some problems with 82540EM

2007-05-17 Thread Eygene Ryabinkin
Sten, good day. Thu, May 17, 2007 at 01:04:29PM +0200, Sten Daniel Soersdal wrote: > >I have the '82540EM Gigabit Ethernet Controller' branded card > >(PWLA8390MT) and I am currently expiriencing troubles with the > >Gigabit switch (D-Link DGS-1008, the cheap one). Plugged into that > >switch I ha

udp fragmentation with pf/ipf

2007-05-17 Thread Hugo Koji Kobayashi
Hello, While making some tests with fragmented udp DNS responses (with EDNS0), we discovered a possible problem with ipf and pf in FreeBSD 6.2 and 7.0 (200705 snapshot). Our test is a DNS query to an DNSSEC enabled server which replies with a ~4KB udp response. We do this with the following dig

Re: udp fragmentation with pf/ipf

2007-05-17 Thread Mark Andrews
This should be rejected as "keep frags" is meaningless here. pass out log quick on bge0 proto udp from xxx.xxx.xxx.113/32 to any port = 53 keep state keep frags You need pass in quick from any to any with frag keep frag -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dun

Re: udp fragmentation with pf/ipf

2007-05-17 Thread Mark Andrews
> > This should be rejected as "keep frags" is meaningless here. > > pass out log quick on bge0 proto udp from xxx.xxx.xxx.113/32 to any port = 53 > keep state keep frags > > You need > > pass in quick from any to any with frag keep frag The reason is that "ip