[SCTP] ICMP unreachable message reenables data transmit

2011-04-30 Thread Schoch Christian
During a measurement with CMT-SCTP and PF i figured out, that sometimes a ICMP Destination unreachable message triggers a message transmission on an inactive data path that has been primary before. It looks as the ICMP message is reseting the inactive state back to active without reseting R

Re: [SCTP] ICMP unreachable message reenables data transmit

2011-04-30 Thread Michael Tüxen
On Apr 30, 2011, at 9:11 AM, Schoch Christian wrote: > During a measurement with CMT-SCTP and PF i figured out, that sometimes a > ICMP Destination unreachable message triggers a message transmission on an > inactive data path that has been primary before. > > It looks as the ICMP message is re

Re: [SCTP] ICMP unreachable message reenables data transmit

2011-04-30 Thread Schoch Christian
Zitat von Michael Tüxen : On Apr 30, 2011, at 9:11 AM, Schoch Christian wrote: During a measurement with CMT-SCTP and PF i figured out, that sometimes a ICMP Destination unreachable message triggers a message transmission on an inactive data path that has been primary before. It looks as

Re: [SCTP] ICMP unreachable message reenables data transmit

2011-04-30 Thread Michael Tüxen
On Apr 30, 2011, at 12:15 PM, Schoch Christian wrote: > > Zitat von Michael Tüxen : > >> On Apr 30, 2011, at 9:11 AM, Schoch Christian wrote: >> >>> During a measurement with CMT-SCTP and PF i figured out, that sometimes a >>> ICMP Destination unreachable message triggers a message transmission

gif interface uses IPv4 address before it is assigned to "real" interface. Is it ok?

2011-04-30 Thread Lev Serebryakov
Hello, Freebsd-net. It seems, gif, configured with "tunnel my-IPv4 other-IPv4" starts to send IPv4 packages BEFORE "my-IPv4" is assigned to any interface in system. I have system, which connected to IPv4-internet via PPPoE with mpd5. Also, it is connected to IPv6-internet with tunnel from Hurri

Re: collisions on tun interfaces ...

2011-04-30 Thread Adrian Chadd
On 30 April 2011 02:56, YongHyeon PYUN wrote: > Sending lots of packets within short interval may overflow > interface's send queue. Try sending UDP packets with netperf and > see what counters are changed during the test with something like > "netstat -ndI tun0 -w 1". The default sendq is 50. W

Re: collisions on tun interfaces ...

2011-04-30 Thread YongHyeon PYUN
On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 11:35:22PM +0800, Adrian Chadd wrote: > On 30 April 2011 02:56, YongHyeon PYUN wrote: > > > Sending lots of packets within short interval may overflow > > interface's send queue. Try sending UDP packets with netperf and > > see what counters are changed during the test wit

Strange DNS problem

2011-04-30 Thread Bakul Shah
I am running a local dns server (bind9). It works ok for the most part but a number of domains do not resolve and I have not been able to detect any pattern. For instance $ host weather.com Host weather.com not found: 3(NXDOMAIN) Here is the tcpdump output (on the internal side): 21:45:14.6622

Re: Strange DNS problem

2011-04-30 Thread Matt Connor
21:45:14.662220 IP 192.168.125.253.20204 > 192.168.125.9.53: 16136+ A? weather.com. (29) 21:45:14.662696 IP 192.168.125.9.53 > 192.168.125.253.20204: 16136 ServFail 0/0/0 (29) ServFail means the authoritative DNS servers for that domain aren't responding. 21:45:14.663090 IP 192.168.125.253.5

Re: collisions on tun interfaces ...

2011-04-30 Thread Adrian Chadd
On 1 May 2011 04:43, YongHyeon PYUN wrote: > It's tunable. Set net.link.ifqmaxlen. I know it's tunable at boot time; I mean why is it that low by default? Adrian ___ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/free