On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 02:41:41PM +, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
[...]
> I am not going to find my posting from a few years back but the
> solution is to keep the kernel and libipsec (and setkey) in base in
> sync and not install libipsec and setkey from the ipsec-tools port.
> Done.
There are two
Sorry I meant to say FreeBSD 7.0 :)
> Hi Guys,
>
> Here's a weird one... I set up FreeBSD 5.2 to act as a router. I used
> the pf.conf script shown at:
> http://www.openbsd.org/faq/pf/pools.html#outgoing
>
> Everything works just fine. Traffic is appropriately load balanced and
> things work as
Hi,
On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 1:06 AM, Shawn Everett wrote:
> Sorry I meant to say FreeBSD 7.0 :)
>
> > Hi Guys,
> >
> > Here's a weird one... I set up FreeBSD 5.2 to act as a router. I used
> > the pf.conf script shown at:
> > http://www.openbsd.org/faq/pf/pools.html#outgoing
> >
> > Everything
Hi Guys,
Here's a weird one... I set up FreeBSD 5.2 to act as a router. I used
the pf.conf script shown at:
http://www.openbsd.org/faq/pf/pools.html#outgoing
Everything works just fine. Traffic is appropriately load balanced and
things work as expected.
Strangely after a few hours something j
On Feb 26, 2009, at 3:43 PM, Shawn Everett wrote:
Here's a weird one... I set up FreeBSD 5.2 to act as a router.
[ ... ]
Any suggestions would be appreciated.
Try upgrading to a supported version of the OS, first, then work on
debugging any deadlocks if they still reoccur.
Early 5.x ver
The following reply was made to PR kern/129508; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: Boris Kochergin
To: bug-follo...@freebsd.org
Cc:
Subject: Re: kern/129508: [panic] Kernel panic with EtherIP (may be related
to SVN commit 178025)
Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2009 23:34:06 -0500
For anyone who was unenth
Hello Ivan,
>> Try reducing the number of CPUs, it might help by reducing contention.
>
> Ok, I'll try.
>
I have tested reducing the number of CPUs but it was helpless because
it causes my system to hang.
Regards,
Siquijor
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org m
Everyone:
Reviewing the latest man page for ipfw(8), I see that the only way
to change the automatic increment for rules is still to set a
sysctl variable (net.inet.ip.fw.autoinc_step). This was once also
the case for "one pass" behavior (net.inet.ip.fw.one_pass) as well
as verbose logging, d
On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 6:48 PM, Ivan Voras wrote:
>
> There is a very experimental patch to the em driver, not endorsed by the
> em driver author (for unknown reasons) that some users claim helps with
> SMP performance. See
> http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-net/2008-December/020441.htm
> Any error messages in dmesg output ?
> Significant changes in "netstat -m" output before and after ?
> The same for "pfctl -s all" output...
The box has been up for about 12 hours now. As a point of discussion here
is the output from netstat and pfctl in case anything obvious jumps out.
38
Hi,
On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 8:41 AM, Shawn Everett wrote:
> > Any error messages in dmesg output ?
> > Significant changes in "netstat -m" output before and after ?
> > The same for "pfctl -s all" output...
>
> The box has been up for about 12 hours now. As a point of discussion here
> is th
11 matches
Mail list logo
