On Mar 5, 2008, at 8:07 PM, Vadim Goncharov wrote:
Hi Michael Tuexen!
On Wed, 5 Mar 2008 11:59:14 +0100; Michael Tuexen wrote about 'Re:
SCTP using questions (API etc.)':
"substreams". SCTP can do it for me, it's wonderful, but in practice
there
are some questions.
How long can be one part
Hello,
I've just upgraded some of our 6-STABLE servers to 7-STABLE to notice
that pf reply-to for directly connected IPs seems to be broken.
I have the following relevant rule in pf.conf:
pass in on $ext_if reply-to ( $ext_if csmvip ) proto tcp from any to any
port 25 label "mxtraffic-tcp" ke
Am Do, 6.03.2008, 09:36, schrieb Attila Nagy:
> Hello,
>
> I've just upgraded some of our 6-STABLE servers to 7-STABLE to notice
> that pf reply-to for directly connected IPs seems to be broken.
>
> I have the following relevant rule in pf.conf:
> pass in on $ext_if reply-to ( $ext_if csmvip ) pro
sleep and coffee, but I can't quite figure out the
network layout you are talking about. Could you draw up a small example
setup so I can follow? Or at least (pseudo-)IP addresses for client,
load-balancer, pf-box and servers?
Of course, see: http://people.fsn.hu/~bra/freebsd/route-to-20080306/
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi, i have a FreeBSD 6.3, fresh install. It is in the corporate
> network and i can't use any tcp network service on that machine from
> any other, which is behind cisco routers with tunnels.
This is a
Hello,
I followed the instructions in carp(4) and set up a load balancing and
failover configuration on vlan interfaces -- it's working fine (as long
as I don't `ifconfig carp25 destroy'...).
In order to really make use of this functionality, I need a user land
method of figuring out whether a MA
> Is it possible that you have PF or IPFW filter rules in place
> that drop ICMP? Just because tcpdump shows you the frame
> arrived at your system, does not mean that it was "seen" by
> the kernel.
No, it's virgin clean install, without any packet filtering enabled
> > here comes icmp fra
> > > here comes icmp frag packets. strange what sometimes
> > tcpdump complains
> > > about tcp header in icmp packet and sometimes not
After looking more closely, if found something strange:
here is part of tcp header of first large packet:
10:32:04.610317 IP (tos 0x8, ttl 64, id 1208, offset
On Sun, Mar 02, 2008 at 07:57:28PM -0800, Christopher Cowart wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 03:03:53PM +0900, Pyun YongHyeon wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 06:38:40PM -0800, Christopher Cowart wrote:
> >>On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 04:43:55PM +0900, Pyun YongHyeon wrote:
> >>>On Mon, Feb 25,
alright, i found who changing packets - it's cisco PIX
# tcpdump -s 0 -nveXi stge1 icmp and host 10.23.0.241
tcpdump: WARNING: stge1: no IPv4 address assigned
tcpdump: listening on stge1, link-type EN10MB (Ethernet), capture size 65535
bytes
this is packet from router with lower mtu just before P
10 matches
Mail list logo
