ssign a
name
via the adapters MAC address -- ie; assign the name us0 | ue1 to the
adapter/NIC
your interested in by it's MAC address and that would give it to you.
HTH
Chris
--HPS
0xBDE49540.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys
okups, are you still
associated?
eg; does the output of ifconfig still show associated? What are the settings
in rc.conf(5) related to your network setup?
Thanks,
Sreenath
HTH
--Chris
On 2024-03-14 21:13, Sreenath Battalahalli wrote:
Hi Chris,
Thanks for your message.
The wifi continues to be associated with access point, and I can ping 1.1.11
as well.
My USB wifi interface is rtwn(earlier urtwn)
It is just that DNS queries fail, even when 1.1.1.1 is accessible, at least
very exceedingly difficult. Which is NOT what the average user
wants,
or expects. I use "set block-policy drop" in pf(4). But as already noted,
this is for "filtering" purposes. Your suggestion also has the negative
affect
of hanging remote ports. Which can result in other negative results by peers.
Please don't. :)
--Chris
On 2024-06-12 15:05, Chris wrote:
On 2024-06-12 14:47, Rodney W. Grimes wrote:
I propose that we start dropping inbound ICMP REDIRECTs by default, by
setting the net.inet.icmp.drop_redirect sysctl to 1 by default (and
changing the associated rc.conf machinery). I've opened a Phabricator
r
On 2024-06-13 06:34, Rodney W. Grimes wrote:
On 2024-06-12 15:05, Chris wrote:
> On 2024-06-12 14:47, Rodney W. Grimes wrote:
>>> I propose that we start dropping inbound ICMP REDIRECTs by default, by
>>> setting the net.inet.icmp.drop_redirect sysctl to 1 by default
On 2024-06-13 06:34, Rodney W. Grimes wrote:
On 2024-06-12 15:05, Chris wrote:
> On 2024-06-12 14:47, Rodney W. Grimes wrote:
>>> I propose that we start dropping inbound ICMP REDIRECTs by default, by
>>> setting the net.inet.icmp.drop_redirect sysctl to 1 by default
On 2024-06-13 06:34, Rodney W. Grimes wrote:
On 2024-06-12 15:05, Chris wrote:
> On 2024-06-12 14:47, Rodney W. Grimes wrote:
>>> I propose that we start dropping inbound ICMP REDIRECTs by default, by
>>> setting the net.inet.icmp.drop_redirect sysctl to 1 by default
On 2024-06-13 06:34, Rodney W. Grimes wrote:
On 2024-06-12 15:05, Chris wrote:
> On 2024-06-12 14:47, Rodney W. Grimes wrote:
>>> I propose that we start dropping inbound ICMP REDIRECTs by default, by
>>> setting the net.inet.icmp.drop_redirect sysctl to 1 by default
On 2024-06-13 06:34, Rodney W. Grimes wrote:
On 2024-06-12 15:05, Chris wrote:
> On 2024-06-12 14:47, Rodney W. Grimes wrote:
>>> I propose that we start dropping inbound ICMP REDIRECTs by default, by
>>> setting the net.inet.icmp.drop_redirect sysctl to 1 by default
On 2024-06-13 06:34, Rodney W. Grimes wrote:
On 2024-06-12 15:05, Chris wrote:
> On 2024-06-12 14:47, Rodney W. Grimes wrote:
>>> I propose that we start dropping inbound ICMP REDIRECTs by default, by
>>> setting the net.inet.icmp.drop_redirect sysctl to 1 by default
On 2024-06-14 05:50, Ed Maste wrote:
On Wed, 12 Jun 2024 at 18:05, Chris wrote:
As Rodeney already effectively explains; dropping packets makes routing,
and discovery exceedingly difficult. Which is NOT what the average user
wants,
This is on end hosts only, not routers (which already drop
uld I ever
need to review the settings in the future.
I just wondered if having two methods is by design, as that way
one can have one value for tcp and another for udp if one goes
the sysctl route.
I think LOG_IN_VAIN=YES sets both these MIBs to 1.
--Chris
quot;
pflog_enable="YES"
(host) pf.conf:
EXT_ADDR="192.168.1.2"
set skip on { lo0, lo1 }
nat pass on wlan0 from { lo1 } to any -> $EXT_ADDR
rdr pass on wlan0 proto tcp from any to { lo1 } -> $EXT_ADDR
Exchanging the EXT_ADDR value with your hosts NIC address. I use
th
o:
nVidia nForce2 USB2.0 controller on ehci0
-- simply put; a USB cable attached from the USB port on the AMD box, to
the USB port on the
modem.
What is the proper usage in rc.conf(5)?
I'm attempting the following:
ifconfig_ue0="ether xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx DHCP"
Thank
Hello,
I have a FreeBSD 7.0 server with patch level 3 and no ipv6 services
running.
SSH / web-server / ftp server / etc stop responding but server responds
to ping.
A reboot fix this.
The logs show nothing.
Any idea what may be wrong?
Regards,
Chris Chatzaras
mplete isolation of the bridges (e.g.
for ARP) while allowing ipfw to examine all three simultaneously?
3. Should I be exploring a different FreeBSD route to
implement this.
Thank you,
Chris Pratt
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
0 divert 8300 ip from any to any
65010 48 7382 allow ip from any to any
Thank you,
Chris Pratt
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Hello,
I was wondering if I'm seeing a normal issue with if_bridge and
having an IP assigned to one of the interfaces within a bridge.
I see a confusing performance problem when attempting to move
data via sftp "to" the machine versus "through" the machine. The
difference is quite pronounced. Whe
rules and leave dynamic rules alone, this
would enable me to use check-state again.
Chris
On Sat, 12 Mar 2005 16:16:08 +0100, Andrea Venturoli
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello.
>
> I noticed that when I issue "sh /etc/rc.firewall" to reload firewall
> rules
iconductor Co., Ltd.'
device = 'RTL8111/8168/8411 PCI Express Gigabit Ethernet Controller'
class = network
subclass = ethernet
Thanks again!
--Chris
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
uch, Artem. I'll have a closer look. I'm thinking of
taking your concept, and upping it to 7k. I'll post back, if anything good
comes of it. :)
Hope this helps.
It does. :)
--Chris
26.11.19 02:44, Chris пише:
> Or at least make it non fatal.
> OK here's the sto
On Tue, 26 Nov 2019 08:06:37 +0200 Artem Viklenko ar...@viklenko.net said
Sorry, small update.
Just re-cheked. It was not final change... wrong place. I've set it even
smaller than 4096. Now it 3072.
Bummer. :(
Sorry.
No problem. Thanks for trying! :)
--Chris
26.11.19 07:55,
your hoping to find; pfctl(8), pfctl -s,
and pfctl -T are a few examples.
HTH
--Chris
--
John W. O'Brien
OpenPGP keys:
0x33C4D64B895DBF3B
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubsc
But I'm also using pf, nat, and rdr. If that should that make a difference.
--Chris
--
Victor Sudakov, VAS4-RIPE, VAS47-RIPN
2:5005/49@fidonet http://vas.tomsk.ru/
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/list
implementation the rc dependency chains should stay the same.
Thanks!
--
Andriy Gapon
--Chris
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
> and that "dns" already has "s" for system, so just "dns" is good
> with me :-)
> >> > >
> >> > > That's a good point.
> >>
> >> I don't agree. The term dns is too generic. People are often running
> &
lternatives and no users.
I should have stated the latter more explicitly.
> more important than the fact that it is old or we have more choices
> in the ports tree. If we have negative factors on maintaining them,
> removing them would be one of the choices as a result. If the
>
being done on re(4).
IOW if we can help in any way. We'll make ourselves available.
Thanks again.
--Chris
Regards,
Kevin
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe
On 2022-01-12 10:48, Gleb Smirnoff wrote:
Hi!
Thanks for the informative writeup, Gleb!
Untrimmed, sorry...
[crossposted to current@, but let's keep discussion at net@]
I have already touched the topic with rrs@, jtl@, tuexen@, rscheff@ and
Igor Sysoev (author of nginx). Now posting for wid
2020 Quarterly report[1]
as well as a report by Adrian that "We know whats missing"[2] somewhat
later on the mailing list.
So where can I find it? :-)
Thank you for all your time, and consideration.
--Chris
1. https://www.freebsd.org/status/report-2020-07-2020-09.html
2. https:/
ndicates they brag on having better privacy than
their competition. Are they using any privacy extensions that may affect
your ability to ping(8) || traceroute(8) -- TCP/UDP/ICMP? Or is it just
that gig1-1-1.gw.davsca11.sonic.net's BGP is out of date (stale)?
HTH
--Chris
===
Mark Millard
marklmi at yahoo.com
0xBDE49540.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys
0.0.58.1.
However, since the kernel update, if 'C' at 10.0.48.1 pings machine 'A'
at 10.0.58.2, the packets get delivered to 'A' and the replies to 'B',
but the replies go missing after B's tun0. Likewise if 'A' tries to send
traffic to '
s ago. It's a new occurance.
-- Chris
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
inside the machine ...
-- Chris
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
gt; ___
I had this problem on a 6.0 RELEASE server but I got it to stop, the
interface is bge0, the problem only occurs when the card is negotiated
in 10mbit, when we switched back to 100mbit full duplex the problem
went away, we also found tha
code? seems a trivial function to have, single ip
jail is very limiting.
thanks
Chris
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
switch to it and/or add that functionality to your favorite firewall
package. :)
Mike "Silby" Silbersack
___
whats the point of keeping a connection alive (hung) to a dead network
for 2 hours tho? That I dont understand either.
Chris
l: tcp_output: inc sockbuf, old 147992,
new 156184, sb_cc 147384, snd_wnd 118736, sendwnd 112944
Nov 22 06:33:34 heaven kernel: tcp_output: inc sockbuf, old 156184,
new 164376, sb_cc 155328, snd_wnd 127424, sendwnd 114261
cant wait for the recv side of this patch.
Chris
, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Is there progress on this yet? still no problems with the current patch :)
Chris
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
th some fuzz):
http://people.freebsd.org/~andre/tcp_auto_buf-20061212.diff
Any tests and test reports are very welcome.
--
Andre
Hi does this patch work on 6.x? I used the send patch on 6.x and works
great please make a 6.x patch thank you and I will
On 14/12/06, Andre Oppermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Chris wrote:
> On 12/12/06, Andre Oppermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> This is a patch adding automatic TCP send and receive socket buffer
>> sizing.
>> Normally the socket buffers are static (either deri
t to 256k
for 'all' connections to allow decent speeds.
With the patch most connections will be just 8k in size and some be 256k.
so worst case scenario with patch during a DOS they will all use 256k
windows but without the patch they would all use 256k regardless
On 21/12/06, LI Xin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
LI Xin wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Chris wrote:
>> I think the opposite, without this patch my send window set to 256k
>> for 'all' connections to allow decent speeds.
>>
>> With the patch most connections w
On 22/12/06, LI Xin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Chris wrote:
[...]
>> >> p.s. waiting still for releng 6 patch :)
>> >
>> > Unofficial backport for andre@'s patch. I am testing it on RELENG_6_2
>> > but the box is not heavily loaded, and please n
On 22/12/06, LI Xin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Chris wrote:
> On 22/12/06, LI Xin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Chris wrote:
>> [...]
>> >> >> p.s. waiting still for releng 6 patch :)
>> >> >
>> >> > Unofficial backport f
On 22/12/06, LI Xin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Chris wrote:
[...]
>> > I ran cvsup again, unfortenatly there was changes in world since the
>> > last cvsup so I have done a new buildworld as well to keep it all
>> > synched and then done a unpatched kernel, a
ynet, and if I ever get around to a completed working version, I
would be more than happy to share, but for now, there are ways to still
fix the problem, just not as elegant as if it where actually a firewall
rule ;)
Chris Bowman
___
freebsd-net@free
be. I’m probably just missing
Something simple, and am looking for another set of eyes.
Thanks all. Contact me off list if you like, or on-list if it’s obvious
what I’ve done and it will help others.
- Chris
[1] https://github.com/vzaliva/simpleproxy
[2] inet6(4), "Intera
way
twice despite thinking I wasn’t.
Sorry for the noise.
- Chris
> On Jun 12, 2022, at 12:40, Chris Ross wrote:
>
>
> Tl;dr;
> I don’t know why I’m getting an EINVAL from a call to bind for a second socket
>
>
>
>
> 20 years ago, I s
still so in 13 or CURRENT, and/or let me know if
I’m doing something wrong?
- Chris
is is the "net" mailing list, but any info about
other built-in components would be helpful as well.
Thanks,
Chris
couple switches away on a single gigabit connection.
Looking on the Cisco switch, the port-channel (connected to the lagg) claims
"BW 200 Kbit/sec”.
Happy to share config with anyone who may be able to help, but won’t paste it
all here.
- Chris
> On Nov 9, 2022, at 14:32, Patrick M. Hausen wrote:
>
>> Am 08.11.2022 um 06:38 schrieb Chris Ross :
>> I have a newer Freebsd 12.3 system with lagg across two 1gbe interfaces.
>> There are a collection of vlan interfaces on the lagg.
>>
>> I would
the PD, so I’d have to code all of that myself.
Thank you.
- Chris
stion might provide me with what I need
as well. Otherwise, an example or three of receiving and utilizing an
IA_PD response is what I am looking for.
- Chris
> On Jul 26, 2024, at 23:21, moto kawasaki wrote:
>
>
> Hi Chris, all
>
> I am struggling the same problem too, and here is my working
> configuration for dhcp6c in my test environment.
> Hope this can be help.
Thank you, moto-san. Roy was/is helping me get dhcpcd w
try to _get_ an
address if there’s already an address, but. Maybe this
is a dhcpd problem, where it shouldn’t respond to requests
from the local address?
Thanks all, sorry for the long message.
- Chris
next question. Sub-interfaces
or alias interfaces maybe?
Thank you.
- Chris
> On Aug 1, 2024, at 12:17, Roy Marples wrote:
>
> On Thu, 01 Aug 2024 16:24:54 +0100 Chris Ross wrote ---
>>
>> [Long message, apologies. Thoughts mostly after the log output.]
>>
>>> On Jul 24, 2024, at 04:12, Roy Marples r...@marples.name>
ption rapid_commit
require dhcp_server_identifier
slaac private
noipv6rs
noipv4
noipv4ll
allowinterfaces vlan0
interface vlan0
ipv6only
ipv6rs
ipv6ra_autoconf
ia_pd 0/::/56 intnet1/42 intnet2/56
Thanks.
- Chris
Apologies for lack of important context, the below discusses a FreeBSD
14.1 amd64 system.
Thank you.
> On Sep 16, 2024, at 16:05, Chris Ross wrote:
>
> Hello. Following the earlier thread "DHCPv6 IA_PD - how-to” I have been
> bringing up a new gateway router for my network.
ilt after the recent
> zfs patch set hit) on stable/14 and it is not seeing that -- but it is not a
> router, it is an end-node running rtsold and gets its IPv6 address via SLACC
> from the router.
I also tried to reproduce this on a couple of non-router machines
and was not able to.
- Chris
oing to have
yet another annoyed party.
http://www.bayofrum.net/~crees/patches/remove-ipf.diff
Chris
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
On 14 April 2013 16:48, Warren Block wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Apr 2013, Chris Rees wrote:
>
>> On 14 April 2013 01:41, Rui Paulo wrote:
>>>
>>> 2013/04/13 16:01?Scott Long ??:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Maybe something else, but whatever it is, it sh
f compat code that pollute the full source
> tree and we will never improve the code just because of old bits
These so called "old bits" are both maintained, and have different
strengths.
Removing dead unmaintained code yes, but having choice makes transition
easier from other OSes; t
w,
>> 1000baseT-FDX-flow-master, auto, auto-flow
>>
>> Also, I'm loading this as a module, but, for as much as I know, this
>> should not make any difference.
>>
>>
>>> Did it ever work or you see the issue only on CURRENT?
>>
>&g
v. 0x
>>> re0: Ethernet address: 00:19:99:f8:d3:0b
>>> miibus0: on re0
>>> rgephy0: PHY 1 on miibus0
>>> rgephy0: none, 10baseT, 10baseT-FDX, 10baseT-FDX-flow, 100baseTX,
>>> 100baseTX-FDX, 100baseTX-FDX-flow, 1000baseT, 1000baseT-master,
>>> 1000baseT-FDX, 1000ba
nce,
> SAM
Aside from many ports available in the ports/net* categories that provide
calculators, and
such. You can use an online version @: http://ultimatedns.net/netcalc
HTH
--chris
> ___
> freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://li
> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 07:57:28AM -0700, Chris H wrote:
>> > On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 01:12:20PM -0700, chr...@ultimatedns.net wrote:
>> >> Greetings,
>> >> I'm not sure whether this best belonged on net@, or stable@
>> >> so I'm usi
> On Tue, 2014-04-01 at 13:19 -0700, Chris H wrote:
>> [...]
>> miibus0: on nfe0
>> rlphy0: PHY 0 on miibus0
>> rlphy0: 10baseT, 10baseT-FDX, 100baseTX, 100baseTX-FDX, auto, auto-flow
>> rlphy1: PHY 1 on miibus0
> [...]---big-snip--8<---
>> mii
>> On Tue, 2014-04-01 at 13:19 -0700, Chris H wrote:
>>> [...]
>>> miibus0: on nfe0
>>> rlphy0: PHY 0 on miibus0
>>> rlphy0: 10baseT, 10baseT-FDX, 100baseTX, 100baseTX-FDX, auto, auto-flow
>>> rlphy1: PHY 1 on miibus0
>> [...]---big-sni
> On Tue, Apr 01, 2014 at 01:40:58PM -0700, Chris H wrote:
>> > On Tue, 2014-04-01 at 13:19 -0700, Chris H wrote:
>> >> [...]
>> >> miibus0: on nfe0
>> >> rlphy0: PHY 0 on miibus0
>> >> rlphy0: 10baseT, 10baseT-FDX, 100baseTX, 10
> On Tue, Apr 01, 2014 at 05:53:51PM -0700, Chris H wrote:
>> > On Tue, Apr 01, 2014 at 01:40:58PM -0700, Chris H wrote:
>> >> > On Tue, 2014-04-01 at 13:19 -0700, Chris H wrote:
>> >> >> [...]
>> >> >> miibus0: on nfe0
>> &
x27;ve tried
most things I've found on the internet. I'm using FreeBSD 10.0 with a
custom kernel for multiple routing tables.
Thanks in advance!
Chris.
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/free
On 06/04/14 04:20, Julian Elischer wrote:
On 4/5/14, 10:22 AM, Chris Smith wrote:
Hi All,
I have a system with 1 network interface with 2 extra VLANs off it
and I'm having some trouble getting the routing working correctly
with it and jails.
bge0 - management - 10.71.100.0/24
bge
> On Thu, Apr 03, 2014 at 01:18:19PM -0700, Chris H wrote:
>> > On Tue, Apr 01, 2014 at 05:53:51PM -0700, Chris H wrote:
>> >> > On Tue, Apr 01, 2014 at 01:40:58PM -0700, Chris H wrote:
>> >> >> > On Tue, 2014-04-01 at 13:19 -0700, Chris H wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 06, 2014 at 10:49:27PM -0700, Chris H wrote:
>> > On Thu, Apr 03, 2014 at 01:18:19PM -0700, Chris H wrote:
>> >> > On Tue, Apr 01, 2014 at 05:53:51PM -0700, Chris H wrote:
>> >> >> > On Tue, Apr 01, 2014 at 01:40:58PM -0700, Chris H
> On Mon, Apr 07, 2014 at 09:40:53AM -0700, Chris H wrote:
>> > On Sun, Apr 06, 2014 at 10:49:27PM -0700, Chris H wrote:
>> >> > On Thu, Apr 03, 2014 at 01:18:19PM -0700, Chris H wrote:
>> >> >> > On Tue, Apr 01, 2014 at 05:53:51PM -0700, Chris H wr
On 23/04/14 19:55, Julian Elischer wrote:
> On 4/23/14, 4:38 AM, Nikolay Denev wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 5:37 PM, Harald Schmalzbauer
>> wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> here, http://svnweb.freebsd.org/base?view=revision&revision=248895
>>> interface route protection was added (so the following p
On 24/04/14 18:24, Alexander V. Chernikov wrote:
On 24.04.2014 01:56, Chris Smith wrote:
On 23/04/14 19:55, Julian Elischer wrote:
On 4/23/14, 4:38 AM, Nikolay Denev wrote:
On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 5:37 PM, Harald Schmalzbauer
wrote:
Hello,
here, http://svnweb.freebsd.org/base?view=revision
On 25/04/14 11:15, Alan Somers wrote:
On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 5:00 PM, Chris Smith wrote:
On 24/04/14 18:24, Alexander V. Chernikov wrote:
On 24.04.2014 01:56, Chris Smith wrote:
On 23/04/14 19:55, Julian Elischer wrote:
On 4/23/14, 4:38 AM, Nikolay Denev wrote:
On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 5
Hello,
Please quote us for the below listed items.
- Solar Panel Module 240/250w
- Sealed Lead Acid Battery 12v 100-200aH
- 11 SQF-2 Grundfos Solar Pump
Also, advice on your acceptable methods of payment and stock availability.
Thank You
Chris Tellis
Beta Battery
les.
Should that address also be the one used to "listen" on?
Apologies for seemingly such a dimwitted question. But even
after reading RFC 5569, I'm still unclear.
Thank you.
--Chris
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
h
> On 6/18/2014 9:36 AM, Chris H wrote:
>> Greetings,
>> I manage a /29 at $home. While I manage _real_ IPv6 on many networks
>> at $work. I'm stuck with 6rd at $home. I don't much care for 6rd. It's
>> still pretty much 6to4. But it's all I have t
> Chris,
>
> On 6/18/2014 8:11 PM, Mail Delivery System wrote:
>> : host mx99.ultimatedns.net[209.180.214.225]
>> said: 550 5.0.0 SPAM and BULK mail REJECTED (in reply to MAIL FROM
>> command)
>
> You might need to adjust your mail filters. :)
Thanks for t
> On 6/18/2014 10:12 PM, Chris H wrote:
>>> FreeBSD doesn't support 6rd. Ironically, pfSense does.
> >
>> Are you sure?
>> There are even a couple of 6rd ports:
>> net/stf-6rd-kmod
>> and
>> net/u6rd
>> or am I to understand that _withou
g
> as you have the details about the tunnel server's IP and the prefix
> you're assigned, you can easily do it manually (or, better, write a tiny
> script to do it for you).
Yes. I have both.
That's good news. Thanks for t
ase let me know if there's any more information I can provide and/or
whether I should get this into a PR.
Thanks,
--
Chris Cowart
Lead Network Engineer
BitGravity, Inc.
A subsidiary of Tata Communications, Ltd.
pgp9b5iL9YlaI.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Hi all,
Forgive me if I sound noobish, but I have been using OpenBSD for a long
time and havent messed with FreeBSD in over 5 years. My situation overall
is thus: I need to connect an internal network to my workplace over
IPSec. It is currently working on OpenBSD, but after all the flack that
c
All things aside, I'm just trying to get it to work on FreeBSD thats all
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Yeah the whole GIF interface thing seemed weird to me too. I'm in much the
same situation I'm connecting to a Watchguard device, similar to the router
I guess you are hooking to.
I did get it to start trying to send, using the ping command. Never
thought I had to kick start the data going to it
I got it to work!
There were some addresses in the SA file (ipsec.conf) that were wrong, ie
192.168 vs. 192.186
Helluva nice error message, I was looking for a literal sending error.
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mail
Now that I have the rest of the system set up, I was going to write a blog
to help out other users /admins. Some of the error messages have
misleading symptoms to say the least LOL.
Actually I still dont have IPV6 working, but I can address that in another
thread.
http://copamadman.blogspot.com/2012/07/freebsd-90-how-to-set-up-ipsec-vpn.html
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
So I'm trying to set up a tunnel with Hurricane Electric. Works great on
OpenBSD BTW, took only a minute or two.
So heres rc.conf
ipv6_gateway_enable="YES"
gif_interfaces="gif0"
gifconfig_gif0="198.168.0.2 64.62.134.130"
ipv6_network_interfaces="rl0 em0 gif0 lo0"
ifconfig_gif0_ipv6="inet6 2001:4
OMG I am so stupid
gifconfig_gif0="192.168.0.2 64.62.134.130" << works
gifconfig_gif0="198.168.0.2 64.62.134.130" << what it was before, doesnt
work
Sorry to waste everyones time
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman
Thats pretty standard for BSD and most Unixes. DHCP hands out leases for a
specified period of time, so unless there is a reason to reset it, it
wont. Windows does that, but it is designed more as a client / user facing
OS whereas BSD is designed to run in the background silently serving you
cont
I work with an old version of AIX all day, there are no shortcuts :(
On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 2:01 PM, Freddie Cash wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 1:52 PM, Chris Benesch
> wrote:
> > Thats pretty standard for BSD and most Unixes. DHCP hands out leases
> for a
> > specifi
Maybe another option to dhclient to have it poll the interface every 2-3
seconds to see if it has lost a link and if so, set the lease timer to be
expired, and wait for it to come back and once it does, it will acquire a
new address.
___
freebsd-net@freeb
1 - 100 of 299 matches
Mail list logo
