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
On 28.11.2011 00:27, Eugene Grosbein wrote:
Do not use natd, use ipfw nat instead - it uses the same libalias
but completely in kernel and avoids gigantic natd overhead.
I guess, I'll have to research this new method... But I don't recall this being
a problem with FreeBSD-7.x -- are there some k
On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 12:12:52PM -0500, Mikhail T. wrote:
> >Do not use natd, use ipfw nat instead - it uses the same libalias
> >but completely in kernel and avoids gigantic natd overhead.
> I guess, I'll have to research this new method... But I don't recall this
> being a problem with FreeBS
All RX, not a single packet arrives.
28.11.2011, 04:59, "Adrian Chadd" :
> Hi,
>
> Are all RX frames dropped at that point, or just the BGP TCP session
> related IP frames?
>
> Adrian
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mai
Old Synopsis: Infinite loop in ipfilter with fragmented IPv6 traffic
New Synopsis: [ipfilter] Infinite loop in ipfilter with fragmented IPv6 traffic
Responsible-Changed-From-To: freebsd-bugs->freebsd-net
Responsible-Changed-By: linimon
Responsible-Changed-When: Mon Nov 28 20:13:21 UTC 2011
Respon
Hello after a longer break ;)
W dniu 2011-10-01 22:02, Freddie Cash pisze:
However, you could setup split-DNS or views and just configure everything to
connect using hostnames. It's extra work to setup, but does make things
easier down-the-road.
I've set up the DNS with views and since one mon
Apologies if the formatting below gets messed up, writing this on my phone.
On Nov 28, 2011 2:36 PM, "Marek Salwerowicz" wrote:
> I am confused about one thing - I wanted to set up pipes for my DMZ hosts
(not to allow my hosts to consume all the bandwidth).
> When I set up the pipes at the beginn
W dniu 2011-11-28 23:49, Freddie Cash pisze:
This is something I've never really received a satisfactory answer to. I
believe you have to put your pipe/queue rules in place of your final allow
rules. IOW, the pipe/queue rules are the final rule that a packet touches
in the ruleset.
For example,
Synopsis: [ed][panic][patch] large traffic yields occasional panics
Responsible-Changed-From-To: freebsd-bugs->freebsd-net
Responsible-Changed-By: linimon
Responsible-Changed-When: Tue Nov 29 04:41:49 UTC 2011
Responsible-Changed-Why:
Over to maintainer(s).
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cg
On Tue, 29 Nov 2011 00:22:04 +0700, Eugene Grosbein wrote:
> Cc: eiv...@dimaga.com, c...@linktel.net, arc...@whistle.com,
> br...@awfulhak.org, suut...@iki.fi, n...@freebsd.org,
> Eugene Grosbein
I've trimmed ccs except net@, feel free to re-add if desired.
> On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at
10 matches
Mail list logo