Re: mpd5.1 MTU problem

2008-07-17 Thread Alexander Motin
Wasily Lin wrote: >set iface enable netflow-in >set iface enable netflow-out >set iface enable ipacct Strange combination. >set iface enable proxy-arp Are you sure you need it? >set iface mtu 1460 <---! That's not a problem, but usual

openospfd+carp

2008-07-17 Thread Alexandre Biancalana
Hi list, I'm deploying a new structure between our company and our datacenter that is composed of two L2L (lan-to-lan) 100Mbit links and two redudant gateway/firewall at each side. I configured one vlan per 100Mbit link and used carp (with Max's carpdev patch) to do the failover between machine

Re: kern/125181: [ndis] [patch] with wep enters kdb.enter.unknown, panics

2008-07-17 Thread Coleman Kane
The following reply was made to PR kern/125181; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Coleman Kane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: kern/125181: [ndis] [patch] with wep enters kdb.enter.unknown, panics Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2008 12:09:

Re: kern/125181: [ndis] [patch] with wep enters kdb.enter.unknown, panics

2008-07-17 Thread Andrew Thompson
The following reply was made to PR kern/125181; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Andrew Thompson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Coleman Kane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: kern/125181: [ndis] [patch] with wep enters kdb.enter.unknown, panics Date: Thu,

Requesting comments on Multi-routing table usage

2008-07-17 Thread Julian Elischer
The current code in -current will add a new interface to all FIBs. So for example when you add a gre interface irt shows up everywhere. This behaviour is probbaly correct for the base NICs on the system when you boot, but it is probably wrong in other cases. For example, when mpd makes tunnel

Re: Requesting comments on Multi-routing table usage

2008-07-17 Thread Ian Smith
On Thu, 17 Jul 2008, Julian Elischer wrote: > The current code in -current will add a new interface to all > FIBs. Consider yanking/reinserting cardbus NICs as one source of fun. > So for example when you add a gre interface irt shows up everywhere. > > This behaviour is probbaly correct fo

Re: Requesting comments on Multi-routing table usage

2008-07-17 Thread Julian Elischer
Ian Smith wrote: On Thu, 17 Jul 2008, Julian Elischer wrote: > The current code in -current will add a new interface to all > FIBs. Consider yanking/reinserting cardbus NICs as one source of fun. > So for example when you add a gre interface irt shows up everywhere. > > This behaviour is

Re: Requesting comments on Multi-routing table usage

2008-07-17 Thread Julian Elischer
Julian Elischer wrote: Ian Smith wrote: On Thu, 17 Jul 2008, Julian Elischer wrote: > The current code in -current will add a new interface to all > FIBs. Consider yanking/reinserting cardbus NICs as one source of fun. > So for example when you add a gre interface irt shows up everywhere.

Re: FreeBSD NAT-T patch integration [CFR/CFT]

2008-07-17 Thread Larry Baird
Sam, > Please test/review the following patch against HEAD: > > http://people.freebsd.org/~sam/nat_t-20080616.patch > > This adds only the kernel portion of the NAT-T support; you must provide > the user-level code from another place. > > The main difference from the patches floating around ar

etc/rc.firewall6

2008-07-17 Thread Daniel Gerzo
Hello freebsd-net, would somebody more knowledgeable then I am in ip6 review this [1] small patch for /etc/rc.firewall6? May I get an approval from some src/ committer to commit this (please keep me in the CC: list)? Thank you. [1] http://cvsup.sk.freebsd.org/~danger/rc.ipfw6.diff --

Re: kern/125003: [gif] incorrect EtherIP header format.

2008-07-17 Thread hrs
Synopsis: [gif] incorrect EtherIP header format. Responsible-Changed-From-To: freebsd-net->hrs Responsible-Changed-By: hrs Responsible-Changed-When: Thu Jul 17 21:47:32 UTC 2008 Responsible-Changed-Why: I will handle this. http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=125003 ___

Re: etc/rc.firewall6

2008-07-17 Thread Doug Barton
Daniel Gerzo wrote: Hello freebsd-net, would somebody more knowledgeable then I am in ip6 review this [1] small patch for /etc/rc.firewall6? May I get an approval from some src/ committer to commit this (please keep me in the CC: list)? Thank you. [1] http://cvsup.sk.freebsd.org/~dan

Re: etc/rc.firewall6

2008-07-17 Thread Chuck Swiger
On Jul 17, 2008, at 3:33 PM, Doug Barton wrote: [ ... ] About the ntp stuff, 2 questions. First, you did not make the same changes in the NTP section in the second hunk as you did in the first, is that intentional? Second, wouldn't it be better to specify the port number (123) on both sides

Re: etc/rc.firewall6

2008-07-17 Thread Max Laier
On Friday 18 July 2008 01:21:28 Chuck Swiger wrote: > On Jul 17, 2008, at 3:33 PM, Doug Barton wrote: > [ ... ] > > > About the ntp stuff, 2 questions. First, you did not make the same > > changes in the NTP section in the second hunk as you did in the > > first, is that intentional? Second, would

Re: etc/rc.firewall6

2008-07-17 Thread Chuck Swiger
On Jul 17, 2008, at 4:35 PM, Max Laier wrote: David Mills' ntpd uses port 123 on both sides, true. Other NTP implementations tend to use ephemeral ports; a quick histogram of 30 seconds or so of traffic to a stratum-2 NTP server suggests about half of the NTP traffic out there uses other port