On 05.03.2013 18:39, Nick Rogers wrote:
Hello,
I am attempting to create awareness of a serious issue affecting users
of FreeBSD 9.x and PF. There appears to be a bug that allows the
kernel's routing table to be corrupted by traffic routing through the
system. Under heavy traffic load, the defau
W dniu 2013-03-06 09:25, Andre Oppermann pisze:
Can you describe your traffic forwarding setup in more detail?
Is it only pf, or do you run netgraph, or other things as well?
Do you use flow routing?
How frequent does this happen?
I'm trying to create a stack graph to see which parts of the net
On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 09:25:21AM +0100, Andre Oppermann wrote:
> I'm trying to create a stack graph to see which parts of the network
> stack are involved in handling your packet.
Ask people if they're using multiple pfil hooks (even just having
ipfilter loaded counts, for instance).
If that's
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 9:38 AM, Krzysztof Barcikowski <
krzys...@airnet.opole.pl> wrote:
> W dniu 2013-03-06 09:25, Andre Oppermann pisze:
>
> Can you describe your traffic forwarding setup in more detail?
>> Is it only pf, or do you run netgraph, or other things as well?
>> Do you use flow routi
I believe I don't have flowtable suport in kernel (no FLOWTABLE option),
and no sysctl's related to flowtable.
How to check if I'm using multiple pfil hooks?
Best regards!
Krzysiek
W dniu 2013-03-06 10:13, Ermal Luçi pisze:
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 9:38 AM, Krzysztof Barcikowski <
krzys...@airn
Hi.
Hi.
On 06.03.2013 12:26, YongHyeon PYUN wrote:
> If you were using latest stable/8, the result would be same on
> CURRENT.
> How frequently do you see the watchdog timeouts? Is there way to
> reproduce it?
> Would you show me the output of dmesg (bge(4) and brgphy(4) only)
> and "pciconf -lcbv
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 7:23 PM, George Neville-Neil
wrote:
>
> On Mar 5, 2013, at 08:54 , h bagade wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I need to get interface MAC address within the kernel code and I couldn't
> > use "getifaddrs" because it's user-mode. How can I have the MAC address
> > information wi
Hi.
On 06.03.2013 12:26, YongHyeon PYUN wrote:
> If you were using latest stable/8, the result would be same on
> CURRENT.
> How frequently do you see the watchdog timeouts? Is there way to
> reproduce it?
> Would you show me the output of dmesg (bge(4) and brgphy(4) only)
> and "pciconf -lcbv"?
I
Has there been any progress on resolving this problem. Does anyone have a
better idea as to where it is breaking down?
I am experiencing the same problem under FreeBSD 9.1-RELEASE. I use PF for
NAT, ALTQ, and RDR/filter rules. I'm not using PPPoE or dhclient. The
default gateway changes to an IP t
Another instance of it..
Adrian
On 6 March 2013 07:21, Courtland wrote:
> Has there been any progress on resolving this problem. Does anyone have a
> better idea as to where it is breaking down?
>
> I am experiencing the same problem under FreeBSD 9.1-RELEASE. I use PF for
> NAT, ALTQ, and RD
Courtland,
the arpresolve observation is very important. Do you have flowtable
enabled in your kernel?
--
Andre
On 06.03.2013 17:16, Adrian Chadd wrote:
Another instance of it..
Adrian
On 6 March 2013 07:21, Courtland wrote:
Has there been any progress on resolving this problem. Does anyone
Greetings,
I'm evaluating an ISP for the sake of building BSD operating systems on
hardware
that they use (DSL modems, in this case). When I had my old NEC server, I had a
MIPS environment to develop in. I managed a 28k kernel. In any case, I'm back at
it for use in alot of hardware I have laying
On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 04:00:34PM +0600, Eugene M. Zheganin wrote:
> Hi.
> Hi.
>
> On 06.03.2013 12:26, YongHyeon PYUN wrote:
> > If you were using latest stable/8, the result would be same on
> > CURRENT.
> > How frequently do you see the watchdog timeouts? Is there way to
> > reproduce it?
> >
Hi.
On 07.03.2013 8:24, YongHyeon PYUN wrote:
What was previous SVN revision number on that machine?
The support for 5718/5719/5720 was merged to stable/8 about 3
months ago.
It was definitely older than "months". It was running something similar
to "FreeBSD 8.2-STABLE #0: Mon Sep 19 08:10:00
On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 11:08:50AM +0600, Eugene M. Zheganin wrote:
> Hi.
>
> On 07.03.2013 8:24, YongHyeon PYUN wrote:
> >What was previous SVN revision number on that machine?
> >The support for 5718/5719/5720 was merged to stable/8 about 3
> >months ago.
> >
> It was definitely older than "mont
Hi,
here is my situation, much like the issue
On 06.03.2013 12:26, YongHyeon PYUN wrote:
> If you were using latest stable/8, the result would be same on
> CURRENT.
I use FreeBSD 9.1-RELEASE #0 r243825: amd65 + ZFS
on HP ProLiant DL360e Gen8
the box has two 4 headed cards igb(4) I350 and bge(4
Hello list!
There is a known long-lived issue with interface routes addition/deletion:
ifconfig iface inet 1.2.3.4/24 can fail if given prefix is already in
kernel route table (for example, advertised by IGP like OSPF).
Interface route can be deleted via route(8) or any route socket user
(so
On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 08:22:51AM +0300, Zeus Panchenko wrote:
> Hi,
>
> here is my situation, much like the issue
>
No, your issue is completely different one.
> On 06.03.2013 12:26, YongHyeon PYUN wrote:
> > If you were using latest stable/8, the result would be same on
> > CURRENT.
>
> I u
Hi.
On 07.03.2013 12:23, YongHyeon PYUN wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 11:08:50AM +0600, Eugene M. Zheganin wrote:
>> It was definitely older than "months". It was running something similar
>> to "FreeBSD 8.2-STABLE #0: Mon Sep 19 08:10:00 YEKST 2011", this is the
>> uname from a neighbor mac
On 07.03.2013 07:34, Alexander V. Chernikov wrote:
Hello list!
There is a known long-lived issue with interface routes addition/deletion:
ifconfig iface inet 1.2.3.4/24 can fail if given prefix is already in kernel
route table (for
example, advertised by IGP like OSPF).
Interface route can be
20 matches
Mail list logo
