Hello Mr.Glatting,
Not that I'm an IPv6 genius, but at first sight your problem seems to be a
route-related. I've put comments in-line.
Le Dim 13 décembre 2009 22:58, Dennis Glatting a écrit :
>
>
> Elmer# netstat -rn
> Routing tables
>
>
> Internet6:
> Destination Gateway
On Saturday 12 December 2009 13:18:53 Paul B Mahol wrote:
> --- /sys/dev/if_ndis/if_ndis_usb.c 2009-11-25 21:49:03.0 +
> +++ if_ndis_usb.c 2009-12-12 12:17:27.0 +
> @@ -165,6 +165,7 @@
> driver_object *drv;
> int devid
Note: to view an individual PR, use:
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=(number).
The following is a listing of current problems submitted by FreeBSD users.
These represent problem reports covering all versions including
experimental development code and obsolete releases.
S Tracker
Synopsis: [ndis] [patch] fix broken scan by passing ies and ies_len pointer to
net80211
State-Changed-From-To: open->closed
State-Changed-By: rpaulo
State-Changed-When: Mon Dec 14 18:43:44 UTC 2009
State-Changed-Why:
fixed, thanks
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=141376
__
The following reply was made to PR kern/141376; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: dfil...@freebsd.org (dfilter service)
To: bug-follo...@freebsd.org
Cc:
Subject: Re: kern/141376: commit references a PR
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2009 18:43:47 + (UTC)
Author: rpaulo
Date: Mon Dec 14 18:43:27 2009
I will take a look at it later today.
-- Qing
> -Original Message-
> From: owner-freebsd-...@freebsd.org [mailto:owner-freebsd-
> n...@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of Dennis Glatting
> Sent: Sunday, December 13, 2009 1:59 PM
> To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
> Subject: Understanding multiple IPv6
The following reply was made to PR kern/139079; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: dfil...@freebsd.org (dfilter service)
To: bug-follo...@freebsd.org
Cc:
Subject: Re: kern/139079: commit references a PR
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2009 19:18:15 + (UTC)
Author: gavin
Date: Mon Dec 14 19:18:02 2009
N
All,
I'm having a very strange problem. I'm running ntop - the unnumbered
interface is not receiving any data.
Running 'tcpdump -i em0' also gets no data. I am really baffled - I've
tried it against a switch that I know has a correctly configured
mirror port, as I have ntop running on another mac
Not familiar with ntop, but I notice below that the em interface is not UP,
what
if you `ifup em0` ?
Jack
On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 11:29 AM, Kurt Buff wrote:
> All,
>
> I'm having a very strange problem. I'm running ntop - the unnumbered
> interface is not receiving any data.
>
> Running 'tcpdu
Sigh. Yes, that works.
So, to expose even more of my ignorance, any thoughts on why it isn't
up at boot?
Kurt
On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 11:35, Jack Vogel wrote:
> Not familiar with ntop, but I notice below that the em interface is not UP,
> what
> if you `ifup em0` ?
>
> Jack
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 14
On 12/10/2009 10:51 PM, Chris Cowart wrote:
> Bruce Cran wrote:
>> I have a router configured using if_bridge with a 4-port NIC that's
>> serving addresses over DHCP. I'd like to add in either rtadvd or
>> DHCPv6, but neither work because the bridge interface doesn't have an
>> IPv6 link-local addr
Usually assigning an address will bring it up, but you arent doing that, I
am
pretty sure using a pseudo device will always necessitating explicitly
bringing
it up, at least i know that is the case for VLANs also.
Jack
On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 11:39 AM, Kurt Buff wrote:
> Sigh. Yes, that works.
Interesting.
I'm doing nothing really very different on my 7.1R box, but don't have
this issue.
Oh, well - just something to keep in mind, I suppose.
Kurt
On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 11:48, Jack Vogel wrote:
> Usually assigning an address will bring it up, but you arent doing that, I
> am
> pretty
Hmmm, well there's a LOT of shared code changes between 7.1 and 8, and this
sounds like something in the device init. I don't really have time to look
into the
difference right now, you'll just have to live with the difference, sorry
:)
Jack
On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 11:52 AM, Kurt Buff wrote:
Heh.
Not a problem.
Kurt
On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 11:57, Jack Vogel wrote:
> Hmmm, well there's a LOT of shared code changes between 7.1 and 8, and this
> sounds like something in the device init. I don't really have time to look
> into the
> difference right now, you'll just have to live with
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Kurt Buff wrote:
> Sigh. Yes, that works.
>
> So, to expose even more of my ignorance, any thoughts on why it isn't
> up at boot?
>
/etc/rc.conf:
ifconfig_em0="UP"
> Kurt
>
> On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 11:35, Jack Vogel wrote:
>> Not familiar wi
Oh, good grief.
That's way too easy. How can I be l33t if it's that simple?
Thanks.
Kurt
On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 12:16, Tom Judge wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Kurt Buff wrote:
>> Sigh. Yes, that works.
>>
>> So, to expose even more of my ignorance, any thoughts
Any idea how to debug problem mentioned in the subject line?
Command used to load stock driver:
kldload if_cxgb.ko
Thanks,
Jack Goral
CONFIDENTIALITY WARNING: This email including any attachments may contain
privileged or confidential information a
Please try the temporary patch at:
http://people.freebsd.org/~qingli/nd6-ns.diff
and it should fix your problem.
-- Qing
> -Original Message-
> From: owner-freebsd-...@freebsd.org [mailto:owner-freebsd-
> n...@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of Li, Qing
> Sent: Monday, December 14, 2009
>
> Hmm, the entry for fd7c:3f2b:e791:1:0:1:ac13:a0a looks suspect. I was
> expecting bce1 rather than lo0, I suppose you were as well :)
>
This loopback route is necessary for short circuiting traffic to
local address within a node.
-- Qing
>
> If I'm not mistaken, the
Thanks. Responses in-line.
On Mon, 14 Dec 2009, JASSAL Aman wrote:
Hello Mr.Glatting,
Not that I'm an IPv6 genius, but at first sight your problem seems to be a
route-related. I've put comments in-line.
Le Dim 13 d?cembre 2009 22:58, Dennis Glatting a ?crit :
Elmer# netstat -rn
Routing
On Mon, 14 Dec 2009, Tom Pusateri wrote:
Does netstat -s show any "bad neighbor solicitation messages" or any
other ip6 or icmp6 errors?
Yes:
Elmer# netstat -s| grep "bad neighbor solicitation"
270 bad neighbor solicitation messages
I'm seeing that and though my symptoms may be
Synopsis: [vge] Strange behavior with vge gigabit ethernet adapter
State-Changed-From-To: open->feedback
State-Changed-By: yongari
State-Changed-When: Mon Dec 14 22:37:50 UTC 2009
State-Changed-Why:
I think I fixed the issue in HEAD. Would you try vge(4) in HEAD?
Responsible-Changed-From-To: f
Synopsis: [vge] vge(4) problem on 8.0-RELEASE
State-Changed-From-To: open->feedback
State-Changed-By: yongari
State-Changed-When: Mon Dec 14 22:40:55 UTC 2009
State-Changed-Why:
I think I fixed the issue in HEAD. Would you try vge(4) in HEAD?
You can download the following latest vge(4) files fro
On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 1:30 PM, Jack Goral wrote:
>
> Any idea how to debug problem mentioned in the subject line?
This card is supported in 8-STABLE (r199206 or later). Looks like
you're running
8.0 release. You can grab cxgb(4) code from stable and build + run it
on your system.
Regards,
Na
You don't need to perform all that route-foo. I believe the root cause of
this issue may be due to a bit of regression in the IPv6 prefix management
code, and I am in the process of putting together a permanent fix.
The issue as it stands today, is due to how the prefix was inserted in
the first
On 12/14/09 5:32 AM, "Julian Elischer" wrote:
> Felix J. Ogris wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I am experiencing some strange problem where FreeBSD sometimes starts
>> sending tcp keepalives after client and server have sent and ack'ed FINs.
>> The server runs 7.1-RELEASE/amd64 with open-vm-tools-nox11-14884
The nd6.c patch is currently compiling.
On Mon, 14 Dec 2009, Li, Qing wrote:
You don't need to perform all that route-foo. I believe the root cause of
this issue may be due to a bit of regression in the IPv6 prefix management
code, and I am in the process of putting together a permanent fix
Would I need to bring the whole system up to HEAD, or can I just add the
relevant vge(4) file to my current RELENG_8 system?
Thanks,
-c
On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 4:38 PM, wrote:
> Synopsis: [vge] Strange behavior with vge gigabit ethernet adapter
>
> State-Changed-From-To: open->feedback
> Sta
The patch works. Thanks.
On Mon, 14 Dec 2009, Li, Qing wrote:
You don't need to perform all that route-foo. I believe the root cause of
this issue may be due to a bit of regression in the IPv6 prefix management
code, and I am in the process of putting together a permanent fix.
The issue as
On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 05:36:19PM -0600, Carey Jones wrote:
> Would I need to bring the whole system up to HEAD, or can I just add the
> relevant vge(4) file to my current RELENG_8 system?
>
You can download the following latest vge(4) files from HEAD and it
should build on 8.0-RELEASE.
http://w
Hello,
The version from HEAD seems to work better than any of the previous patches
I've tried, though it still doesn't seem to get quite the throughput that
the adapter managed under RELENG_7. Unfortunately I don't have any
quantitative data for you. However, the symptoms from my pr are definite
On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 08:58:19PM -0600, Carey Jones wrote:
> Hello,
>
> The version from HEAD seems to work better than any of the previous patches
> I've tried, though it still doesn't seem to get quite the throughput that
> the adapter managed under RELENG_7. Unfortunately I don't have any
>
All,
I've got a Lenovo t61 with 4gbytes RAM that is giving me fits.
It's got a 3945abg chip in it, and it's getting really flaky. I can
boot it up, and work at the console for a while, and that seems to
work OK, usually.
However, today, when I start up my gui (xfce4), wireless just dies on
me. F
Please find the more proper fix at
http://people.freebsd.org/~qingli/nd6-patch.diff
I realized I was slightly off in my previous email after
I spent a bit more time looking through the problem.
Both prefixes are present but one was marked off-link due
to the fact only a single prefix rou
On 2009-12-11 20.23, "Mike Tancsa" wrote:
> At 11:33 AM 12/11/2009, David DeSimone wrote:
>> Jon Otterholm wrote:
>>>
>>> If I restart racoon or wait approximately 30 min the connection is
>>> re-established.
>>
>> Since this is approximately ½of the phase 2 lifetime, you are probably
>> run
36 matches
Mail list logo
