Re: packet delay because of blackhole

2008-04-01 Thread Rui Paulo
On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 08:14:58PM +0300, Anthony Pankov wrote: > Just for somebody convince. > > While analyzing client<->server HTTPS conversation one second delay in > packet exchange was discovered (strongly reproducible): > > Sample: > Ntime > 6 0.00230310.28.4.14

kern/122331: 7.0-RELEASE && panic in Wifi area with WPA mode (not in WEP mode)

2008-04-01 Thread Matthias Apitz
Hello, I've just filed the following bug report: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=122331 Synopsis: 7.0-RELEASE && panic in Wifi area with WPA mode (not in WEP mode) when wpa_supplicant with WPA is used (i.e. the problem does not occure with WEP. even not in days of uptime) the kerne

Re: kern/118975: [bge] [patch] Broadcom 5906 not handled by FreeBSD

2008-04-01 Thread Benjamin Close
The following reply was made to PR kern/118975; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Benjamin Close <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Thomas_Nystr=F6m?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: kern/118975: [bge] [patch] Broadcom 5906 not handled by FreeBSD Date:

Re[2]: packet delay because of blackhole

2008-04-01 Thread Anthony Pankov
Hello Rui, Tuesday, April 01, 2008, 2:41:29 PM, you wrote: RP> On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 08:14:58PM +0300, Anthony Pankov wrote: >> Just for somebody convince. >> >> While analyzing client<->server HTTPS conversation one second delay in >> packet exchange was discovered (strongly reproducible): >>

Re: kern/122319: [wi] imposible to enable ad-hoc demo mode with Orinoco Gold PC card

2008-04-01 Thread Simas Kvilius
Addition info: Today I tested FreeBSD6.3 wi driver and inspected underlying wi code. I found out that FreeBSD6.3 has the same adhoc demo bug as 7.0 (inability to turn on ad-hoc demo mode), I added following code to /dev/wi/if_wi.c line 385: ic->ic_caps |= IEEE80211_C_AHDEMO; This code line compl

panic: tcp_addoptions: TCP options too long w/ with TCP_SIGNATURE support

2008-04-01 Thread Mark Atkinson
I have a 8-CURRENT kernel compiled with the following options, from about march 5th. optionsIPSEC optionsTCP_SIGNATURE #include support for RFC 2385 device crypto device cryptodev device pf device pflog device vlan I also have

Re: panic: tcp_addoptions: TCP options too long w/ with TCP_SIGNATURE support

2008-04-01 Thread Mark Atkinson
Mark Atkinson wrote: > I have a 8-CURRENT kernel compiled with the following options, from about > march 5th. > > optionsIPSEC > optionsTCP_SIGNATURE #include support for RFC 2385 > device crypto > device cryptodev > > device pf > device

Re: panic: tcp_addoptions: TCP options too long w/ with TCP_SIGNATURE support

2008-04-01 Thread Rui Paulo
Hi, On Tue, Apr 01, 2008 at 09:08:35AM -0700, Mark Atkinson wrote: > I have a 8-CURRENT kernel compiled with the following options, from about > march 5th. > > optionsIPSEC > optionsTCP_SIGNATURE #include support for RFC 2385 > device crypto > device cr

Re: panic: tcp_addoptions: TCP options too long w/ with TCP_SIGNATURE support

2008-04-01 Thread Mark Atkinson
Rui Paulo wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, Apr 01, 2008 at 09:08:35AM -0700, Mark Atkinson wrote: >> I have a 8-CURRENT kernel compiled with the following options, from about >> march 5th. >> >> optionsIPSEC >> optionsTCP_SIGNATURE #include support for RFC 2385 >> device

Re: panic: tcp_addoptions: TCP options too long w/ with TCP_SIGNATURE support

2008-04-01 Thread Andre Oppermann
Mark Atkinson wrote: Rui Paulo wrote: Hi, On Tue, Apr 01, 2008 at 09:08:35AM -0700, Mark Atkinson wrote: I have a 8-CURRENT kernel compiled with the following options, from about march 5th. optionsIPSEC optionsTCP_SIGNATURE #include support for RFC 2385 device

Re: panic: tcp_addoptions: TCP options too long w/ with TCP_SIGNATURE support

2008-04-01 Thread Rui Paulo
On Tue, Apr 01, 2008 at 10:00:49PM +0200, Andre Oppermann wrote: > > The order of the TCP options was changed recently to fix another problem. > This has caused sub-optimal padding and this overflow as not all options > fit. The tcp_addoptions() loop is not bound internally. > > http://www.freeb

Re: panic: tcp_addoptions: TCP options too long w/ with TCP_SIGNATURE support

2008-04-01 Thread Andre Oppermann
Rui Paulo wrote: On Tue, Apr 01, 2008 at 10:00:49PM +0200, Andre Oppermann wrote: The order of the TCP options was changed recently to fix another problem. This has caused sub-optimal padding and this overflow as not all options fit. The tcp_addoptions() loop is not bound internally. http://ww

Re: panic: tcp_addoptions: TCP options too long w/ with TCP_SIGNATURE support

2008-04-01 Thread Andre Oppermann
Andre Oppermann wrote: Mark Atkinson wrote: Rui Paulo wrote: Hi, On Tue, Apr 01, 2008 at 09:08:35AM -0700, Mark Atkinson wrote: I have a 8-CURRENT kernel compiled with the following options, from about march 5th. optionsIPSEC optionsTCP_SIGNATURE #include support

Re: panic: tcp_addoptions: TCP options too long w/ with TCP_SIGNATURE support

2008-04-01 Thread Bruce M. Simpson
Dontcha just hate broken vendor NAT? Yes, it seems reasonable that SACK is the sacrificial victim. Considering folk normally configure TCP-MD5 between routers which are usually directly connected on the same switch, doing away with SACK should be fine. Funny, I was staring at that define mom

Re: kern/122331: [panic] 7.0-RELEASE && panic in Wifi area with WPA mode (not in WEP mode)

2008-04-01 Thread Matthias Apitz
El día Wednesday, April 02, 2008 a las 12:24:26AM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió: > Synopsis: [panic] 7.0-RELEASE && panic in Wifi area with WPA mode (not in WEP > mode) > > State-Changed-From-To: open->closed > State-Changed-By: linimon > State-Changed-When: Wed Apr 2 00:24:15 UTC 2008 > St