I posted this message to the -questions list an hour or so ago.
Possibly it's of interest to people on this list. Certainly the
problem is non-obvious, so even (as I suspect) if it's my fault, it
would be interesting to document the problem.
Greg
- Forwarded message from Greg
On Tuesday, 7 June 2005 at 11:48:48 +0200, Marc Olzheim wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 07:07:17PM +0930, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
>> I posted this message to the -questions list an hour or so ago.
>> Possibly it's of interest to people on this list. Certainly
On Wednesday, 8 June 2005 at 10:49:46 +0200, Jeremie Le Hen wrote:
> Hi Greg,
>
>> I don't see any reply. But that's not surprising, since the echo
>> packet doesn't get delivered. To summarize again:
>>
>> - rl0 is the external interface (-> DSL), IP 150.101.14.10.
>> - xl0 is the internal inte
On Wednesday, 8 June 2005 at 12:40:53 +0200, Jeremie Le Hen wrote:
>>> It's currently pushing 7:30 pm, and I was going to send out a reply
>>> tomorrow. But indeed, it seems that Linux people prefer GRE tunnels,
>>> we prefer (with good reason) IP tunnels, and the whole issue was one
>>> of docum
On Thursday, 9 June 2005 at 1:46:00 +0200, Jeremie Le Hen wrote:
> Greg,
>
>> My understanding is that GRE is to IP as PPP is to SLIP: it allows
>> multiple protocols to be encapsulated. I've done some tracing with
>> Ethereal, and the only difference is a four-byte header in front of
>> the pay
On Thursday, 9 June 2005 at 8:13:54 +0200, Gianmarco Giovannelli wrote:
> At 02.10 09/06/2005, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
>> On Thursday, 9 June 2005 at 1:46:00 +0200, Jeremie Le Hen wrote:
>>> Greg,
>>>
>>>> My understanding is that GRE is
On Friday, 10 June 2005 at 22:26:01 -0700, Stephen J. Bevan wrote:
> Jeremie Le Hen writes:
>> Given the simplicity of gif(4) IP-encapsulated packets, I wonder
>> how Linux guys could have implemented something else in their IPIP
>> module :-).
>
> They didn't, Linux IPIP exactly what it sounds lik
On Friday, 10 June 2005 at 22:59:57 -0700, Stephen J. Bevan wrote:
> Greg 'groggy' Lehey writes:
>> Certainly that confusion exists. But it doesn't seem to be the
>> problem here: the original poster (Gianmarco?) stated that he had
>> tried to set up a tunnel
Last week, at the Linux.conf.au in Dunedin, Van Jacobson presented
some slides about work he has been doing rearchitecting the Linux
network stack. He claims to have reduced the CPU usage by 80% and
doubled network throughput (he expects more, but it was limited by
memory bandwidth). The approach
On Thursday, 31 July 2003 at 23:14:52 +0200, Paolo Pisati wrote:
>
> Hi guys,
>
> still here with my netgraph node.
>
> Today, after a couple of nice days without a problem,
> i spent the last 4 hours trying to understand why the hell,
> my module crash my stable box.
> ...
> #0 dumpsys () at /usr
10 matches
Mail list logo
