The following reply was made to PR kern/122780; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: Paul
To: Ed Maste
Cc: bug-follo...@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: kern/122780: [lagg] tcpdump on lagg interface during high pps
wedges netcode
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 2009 23:33:59 -0400
Yes next time I reboot one of the
Get these with GRE tunnel on
FreeBSD 7.0-STABLE FreeBSD 7.0-STABLE #5: Sun May 11 19:00:57 EDT
2008 :/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/ROUTER amd64
But do not get them with 7.0-RELEASE
Any ideas what changed? :) Wish there was some sort of changelog..
# of messages per second seems consistent with p
ng of the message.. probably be good in the
future, but something is wrong because I've added a default and removed
it also so maybe something with the -STABLE code that changed something
in the routing area..
Bruce M. Simpson wrote:
Paul wrote:
Get these with GRE tunnel on
FreeBSD
KED(rt);
out:
if (error)
rtstat.rts_badredirect++;
Hrm.. what's a good way to disable the RT_MISS messages .. I guess ill
have to add a check to see if msgtype=RTM_MISS and bypass the
reporting... Is there a way to make it report what the source ip address
it is trying to find a r
hines by the way.
It even does this with just a handful of routes in the routing table , I
tried that too just to rule that out.
I don't remember Freebsd 4/5 doing this??
Thank you.
Paul
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.fre
I have the same 'problem' if that helps any.. Sockets stuck for over a
month in CLOSED and they have a * for the port on the source IP.
tcp4 0 0 67.1.1.1.* 67.1.1.2.1261 CLOSED
7.0-RELEASE-p1 FreeBSD 7.0-RELEASE-p1 #6: Thu Apr 17 18:11:49 EDT 2008
amd64
Doesn't seem
Hi Eygene.. It happens with telnet :) A lot of my closed entries are
from telnet so I can't really put a finger on any specific application :/
Eygene Ryabinkin wrote:
Paul, good day.
Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 08:45:50AM -0400, Paul wrote:
I have the same 'problem' if that help
take before it errors out so I can figure out
something to do with it.. :P
Thanks :)
Paul
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At Thu, 26 Jun 2008 23:25:18 -0400,
Paul wrote:
I have a FreeBSD router set up with Full BGP routes and I'm doing some
tests on using it for routing.
7.0-RELEASE-p1 FreeB
This is just a question but who can get more than 400k pps forwarding
performance ?
I have tested fbsd 6/7/8 so far with many different configs. (all using
intel pci-ex nic and SMP)
fbsd 7-stable/8(current) seem to be the fastest and always hit this
ceiling of 400k pps. Soon as it hits that I
11242 24360300465 0 25234 0
387329 19426 24014402440 0 23938 0
Ingo Flaschberger wrote:
Dear Paul,
tried interface polling?
what hardware system? how are the nic's connected?
Kind regards,
ingo flaschberger
geschae
show either of my 'floods'
tcpdump -n -i em1 tcp
shows my floods
tcpdump -n -i em0
shows them all.. and they say TCP ..lol :) Weird I tell ya!
So the bottom line is, why do one type of packet generate RTM_MISS and
another doesn't?
I haven't confirmed this, but I don'
nting this also.
There's a lot of differences in the /net dir from release to stable but
most are in bridging/gif/lagg etc.
Route.c the only difference is
-RELEASE
+STABLE
- rtfree(rt);
+ RTFREE_LOCKED(rt);
Must be generating it from somewhere else?
ld do 300kpps on a p3 and now I have a 3ghz xeon
and 2.2ghz opteron brand new hardware and can barely get more than
that.. Doesn't make sense to me.
Ingo Flaschberger wrote:
Dear Paul,
does the em-task jump from cpu to cpu?
(mp-systems are not really better for forwarding performan
Well who wants to code it ? I would gladly pay someone to make it work
the way I want. :) It needs to be able to do line rate gig-e with 64
byte packets and 250k routes.
FBSD6 is definitely slower.
Haven't tried dragonfly.
Thanks
Ingo Flaschberger wrote:
Dear Paul,
Yes it does b
he output taskq?
Mike Tancsa wrote:
At 08:16 PM 6/29/2008, Ingo Flaschberger wrote:
Dear Paul,
Yes it does but it seems to use a lot more of one cpu than the
others so It's really not SMP.. Can I stop it from doing this with
some setting?
Why can't there be 4 taskq's?
it i
ems to use
less cpu, although I haven't generated the same pps with that yet.. I am
going to test it soon
Ingo Flaschberger wrote:
Dear Paul,
I tried this.. I put 6-STABLE (6.3), using default driver was slower
than FBSD7
have you set the rx/tx buffers?
/boot/loader.conf
hw.em.rxd=4096
due
to no buffer and rx overruns (dev.em.0.stats=1)
Mike Tancsa wrote:
At 04:04 AM 6/29/2008, Paul wrote:
This is just a question but who can get more than 400k pps forwarding
performance ?
OK, I setup 2 boxes on either end of a RELENG_7 box from about May 7th
just now, to see with 2 boxe
ens in 7-STABLE and (8) -CURRENT, I tested both.
There are no RTM_MISS message in 7-RELEASE so someone changed something
to -STABLE :/
Paul
Steve Bertrand wrote:
Mike Tancsa wrote:
At 04:04 AM 6/29/2008, Paul wrote:
This is just a question but who can get more than 400k pps
forwarding perf
Well it's supposed to, but it doesn't seem to do it as well as it should :>
How about copying header direct DMA from NIC into cache, then copy from
cache into output NIC after applying whatever filters/changes/etc?
Ingo Flaschberger wrote:
Dear Alex,
>OK, I setup 2 boxes on either end of
All the NIC drivers in 7 pretty much use interrupt moderation so it can
never lock the machine anyway.. This effectively kills polling and it
really no longer has any use except to be able to have a fraction of the
cpu set aside for user space but you can do that anyway with SMP
Support (Rudy
to be limited by the
routing path in the kernel more than anything else.
If a driver/hardware didn't support interrupt mitigation then it would
definitely lock the machine.
Sepherosa Ziehau wrote:
On 7/1/08, Paul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
All the NIC drivers in 7 pretty mu
Dual opteron 270
32 bit GENERIC KERNEL Nothing changed in sysctl except forwarding and ip
forwarding
Broadcom interfaces on board NIC
last pid: 11557; load averages: 1.13, 0.83,
0.48 up
0+03:24:26 21:58:38
70 processes: 6
16K CPU3 3 37:48 99.02% em0 taskq
14 root 171 ki31 0K16K RUN0 340:08 85.94% idle: cpu0
38 root -68- 0K16K - 1 8:46 12.06% em1 taskq
How do you like those IDLE CPUS :) except 3 of course.. :>
Paul wrote:
Dual opteron 270
32 bit GENERIC KERNEL Noth
sd.net you
wrote:
>Paul wrote:
>> Get these with GRE tunnel on
>> FreeBSD 7.0-STABLE FreeBSD 7.0-STABLE #5: Sun May 11 19:00:57 EDT
>> 2008 :/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/ROUTER amd64
>> But do not get them with 7.0-RELEASE
>>
>> Any ideas what changed? :) Wish th
[Big list of testing , rebuilding kernel follows]
Dual Opteron 2212, Recompiled kernel with 7-STABLE and removed a lot of
junk in the config, added
options NO_ADAPTIVE_MUTEXES
not sure if that makes any difference or not, will test without.
Used ULE scheduler, used preemption, CPUTYP
Thanks.. I was hoping I wasn't seeing things :>
I do not like inconsistencies.. :/
Stefan Lambrev wrote:
Greetings Paul,
--OK I'm stumped now.. Rebuilt with preemption and ULE and
preemption again and it's not doing what it did before..
I saw this in my configuration
I am going to.. I have an opteron 270 dual set up on 32 bit and the 2212
is set up on 64 bit :)
Today should bring some 32 bit results as well as etherchannel results.
Ingo Flaschberger wrote:
Dear Paul,
Dual Opteron 2212, Recompiled kernel with 7-STABLE and removed a lot
of junk in the
I can't reproduce the 580kpps maximum that I saw when I first compiled
for some reason, I don't understand, the max I get even with ULE and
preemption
is now about 530 and it dips to 480 a lot.. The first time I tried it it
was at 580 and dipped to 520...what the?.. (kernel config attached at en
e droppedhmm?
32 bit system is compiling now.. won't do > 400kpps with GENERIC
kernel, as with 64 bit did 450k with GENERIC, although that could be
the difference between opteron 270 and opteron 2212..
Paul
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailin
What options do you have enabled on the linux server?
sysctl -a | grep net.ipv4.tcp
and on the bsd
sysctl -a net.inet.tcp
It sounds like a problem with BSD not handing the dropped data or ack
packets so what happens is it pushes a burst of
data out > 100mbit and the switch drops the packets and
lds a lot higher or it bombs with 'too
many neighbors'... I don't see a setting like this in BSD sysctl .
Thanks!
Paul
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send
ulates having 3 rx queues because it has a separate process for each
interface
and the result is WAY more CPU usage and a little over half the pps
throughput with a single port ..
If anyone is interested in tackling some these issues please e-mail me.
It would be greatly appreciated.
Paul
I was a programmer sometimes, but network
engineering will have to do. :D
Julian Elischer wrote:
Paul wrote:
Is PF better than ipfw? iptables almost has no impact on routing
performance unless I add a swath of rules to it and then it bombs
I need maybe 10 rules max and I don'
ng to drop in a 3ghz opteron instead of the 2ghz 2212 that's in
here and see how that scales, using UP same kernel etc I have now.
Julian Elischer wrote:
Paul wrote:
ULE without PREEMPTION is now yeilding better results.
input (em0) output
packets errs
700-720 kpps..
actualyl got 40% cpu idle lol
Oh well.. Tomorrow hopefully test and 32 bit test.. then i'm done
for while.. :P
Paul
Ingo Flaschberger wrote:
Dear Paul,
SMP DISABLED on my Opteron 2212 (ULE, Preemption on)
Yields ~750kpps in em0 and out em1 (one direction
s optimized it could do millions of
pps :/
Ingo Flaschberger wrote:
Dear Paul,
I still don't like the huge hit ipfw and lagg take :/
I think, you can't use fastforward with with lagg.
** I tried polling in UP mode and I got some VERY interesting results..
CPU is 44% idle (idle
Works for me on test machine.. I was expecting a performance increase,
but nothing changed.. Just no more route messages, zebra will be happy.
Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
On Wed, 2 Jul 2008, Mike Tancsa wrote:
Hi,
Index: sys/netinet/ip_input.c
=
bit.
Now I wonder what happens if I go back to the 64 bit and try 1000
256/256 ?? I don't think I tried that one..
Guess another reinstall :>
Installing 64 bit.. (again) Just to be sure..
Paul
Ingo Flaschberger wrote:
Dear Paul,
SMP DISABLED on my Opteron 2212 (ULE, P
Bruce Evans wrote:
On Wed, 2 Jul 2008, Paul wrote:
...
---Reboot with 4096/4096(my guess is that it will be
a lot worse, more errors..)
Without polling, 4096 is horrible, about 200kpps less ... :/
Turning on polling..
polling on, 4096 is bad,
input
Bruce Evans wrote:
On Thu, 3 Jul 2008, Paul wrote:
Bruce Evans wrote:
No polling:
843762 25337 52313248 1 0178 0
763555 0 47340414 1 0178 0
830189 0 51471722 1 0178 0
838724 0 52000892
3)
hptrr: HPT RocketRAID controller driver v1.1 (Feb 24 2008 10:34:18)
acpi0: on motherboard
acpi0: [ITHREAD]
acpi0: Power Button (fixed)
acpi0: reservation of fec0, 1000 (3) failed
acpi0: reservation of fee0, 1000 (3) failed
acpi0: reservation of 0, a (3) failed
acpi0: reservation of 10, 3ff00
en I'm going to apply the polling patch and try that.
Bruce Evans wrote:
On Thu, 3 Jul 2008, Paul wrote:
Bruce Evans wrote:
No polling:
843762 25337 52313248 1 0178 0
763555 0 47340414 1 0178 0
830189 0 51471722
I tried polling, and I tried the polling patch that was posted to the
list and both work but generate too many errors (missed packets).
Without polling the packet errors ONLY occur when the cpu is near 100% usage
Paul wrote:
Opteron UP mode, no polling
input (em0)
ngo Flaschberger wrote:
Dear Paul,
Opteron UP mode, no polling
input (em0) output
packets errs bytespackets errs bytes colls
1071020 0 66403248 2 0404 0
that looks good. (but seems to be near the limit
I tried all of this :/ still, 256/512 descriptors seem to work the best.
Happy to let you log into the machine and fiddle around if you want :)
Paul
Ingo Flaschberger wrote:
Dear Paul,
what could cause this?
*) kern.polling.idle_poll enabled?
*) kern.polling.user_frac
their
mailing list.
Bart Van Kerckhove wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Paul / Ingo,
I tried all of this :/ still, 256/512 descriptors seem to work the
best. Happy to let you log into the machine and fiddle around if you
want :)
I've been watching this threa
i'd love
to try it :)
Something with a really big L1 cache :P
Paul wrote:
ULE + PREEMPTION for non SMP
no major differences with SMP with ULE/4BSD and preemption ON/OFF
32 bit UP test coming up with new cpu
and I'm installing dragonfly sometime this weekend :]
UP: 1mpps in one directi
(82571 supports 2x/2x 575/6 support
4x/4x)
Paul
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
0 FSB even though the bandwidth is higher)
With higher latency in the 'server' machines we probably need to do
things in bigger chunks.. Anyone
using a FBSD router isn't going to care about a 1ms delay in the packet
but they will care if packets are
dropped
I hope so, if they maintain the driver then why wouldn't they make it
take advantage of their own hardware?
I hope they are stuck focusing on windows users :/
Mike Tancsa wrote:
At 02:44 PM 7/7/2008, Paul wrote:
Also my 82571 NIC supports multiple received queues and multiple
transmit q
We could add this as a part of the fastforwarding code and for a router
turn it on and for a server leave it off.
When I use a FBSD box for a router, it doesn't do anything else, so
there could be two optimized paths that is one for
routing/forwarding/firewalling only
and one for use as a serv
ied it but just browsing the driver source
doesn't look like it will work.
Mike Tancsa wrote:
At 02:44 PM 7/7/2008, Paul wrote:
Also my 82571 NIC supports multiple received queues and multiple
transmit queues so why hasn't
anyone written the driver to support this? It's
Will someone confirm if it will support the 82571EB ? I don't see a
reason why not as it's very similar hardware
and it's available now in large quantities so making 82571 part of igb I
think would be a good idea.
Kip Macy wrote:
I have a pre-production card. With some bug fixes and some tun
But this is probably no routing table, and single source and dst ips or
very limited number of ips and ports.
the entire problem with Linux is the route cache, try and generate
random source ips and random source/dst ports
and it won't even do 100kpps without problems.
I would like to log into
ables only adds a few percentage onto the CPU
usage. But still, what's with that..
So far FreeBSD got the highest pps rating for forwarding. I haven't
tried bridge mode. Ipfw probably takes a big hit in that too though.
Looking for an 82575 t
I am curious because we have a LOT of 4 port 82571 PCI-E cards and they
are not cheap. :]
Thanks
Paul
Jack Vogel wrote:
There is a change that has been in the STABLE tree for a few months,
but many might have missed it,
its an important change to note and possibly for some prepare for with
th
itations)?
I plan on buying the dual port ET controller[82576] (which was supoosed
to be shipping last month) but I can't find one anywhere! argh..
Thanks
Paul
Jack Vogel wrote:
On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 8:13 PM, Paul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Jack. Will the em driver ever s
s per second for instance), although
it's still the most flexible.
Please keep us updated on any interesting changes to the em/igb/ixgb :>
I have ordered an 82575 card and will be testing it along with some
other CPUs to fire up my routing performance thread again :> :>
Paul
d mean? I see some incrementing slowly and would like some help
tuning the polling values to rid myself of new increments of the
lost/suspsect/stalled. But first this tcpdump problem should be
addressed.
Thank you!!
Paul
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.o
The following reply was made to PR amd64/122780; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: Paul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc:
Subject: Re: amd64/122780: [lagg] tcpdump on lagg interface during high pps
wedges netcode
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2008 18:40:53 -0400
It
I had some similar issues for some reason.. Check the output of netstat -m
and see if the mbuf clusters in use line if the total is anywhere near
the max. Mine was maxing out and causing some very weird problems with
no errors in any log anywhere.
Paul Haddad wrote:
Hi All,
I've go
I've been waiting for something like this. Linux has done policy
routing for many many years and is very good at it. I prefer to use
FreeBSD for routing though and this is a feature I have been waiting for :)
Mainly to use with BGP , having multiple BGP routing tables. I would
like it to be
Is there a list of patches that have been applied to -STABLE since
the -RELEASE ?
I can't seem to find a simple organized list of applied patches
(something similar to linux kernel changelog).
I want to know if anything has been fixed or udpated in the network area
to see if it warrants chang
This is very strange.. I can do:
netstat -w 10 -I lagg0
input(lagg0) output
packets errs bytespackets errs bytes colls
57806 0 41751685 232442 0 51062425 0
56459 0 38341591 225146 0 48865209 0
60687
t to see the traffic only on single interface you should use -I
I do not know if this is bug, but netstat -w 100
something_non_existing works on my bsd and just shows "Total"
So may be from here comes the confusion. You think, that netstat count
only traffic on lagg0,
but it shows
This would be awesome, like the Yandex driver for fbsd 6..
I wish there was some way of doing this for 7.0 :) maybe this is it..
So this is the question now...
Markus Oestreicher wrote:
Good Day,
I see that the new igb driver has a tunable for multiple rx/tx queues.
Is that for future us
Probably still in the routing table and didn't get removed when the
interface was destroyed..
do a route get 10.5.43.225
Support (Rudy) wrote:
I created and destoryed, brought up and down a vlan... now it is not
accepting an IP what does the 'File exists' mean?
#ifconfig vlan9
vlan9: fl
Hoping maybe one of you can test this as I didn't have time to look into
it, but I tried twice.
Setting up gre interface and then using IPFW
Gre interface 1.1.1.1 -- 1.1.1.2
ipfw fwd 1.1.1.2 ip from any to any recv lagg2
Command works no problem. The instant any traffic at all is sent
incom
Grr.. forgot..
7.0-STABLE FreeBSD 7.0-STABLE #5: Sun May 11 19:00:57 EDT 2008 amd64
Paul wrote:
Hoping maybe one of you can test this as I didn't have time to look
into it, but I tried twice.
Setting up gre interface and then using IPFW
Gre interface 1.1.1.1 -- 1.1.1.2
ipfw fwd 1.1.1.
Hi dev team,
It's not a secret that when application is trying to establish new TCP
connection, without
first binding a socket to specific local interface address, OS handles that
automatically.
Unfortunately there is a catch, that lies in a different logic of local port
allocation:
(1) when s
Hi team,
Recently we had an upgrade to 12 Stable. Immediately after, we have started
seeing some strange connection establishment timeouts to some fixed number
of external (world) hosts. The issue was persistent and easy to reproduce.
Thanks to a patience and dedication of our system engineer we
Hi Michael,
8 July 2019, 15:53:15, by "Michael Tuexen" :
> > On 8. Jul 2019, at 12:37, Paul wrote:
> >
> > Hi team,
> >
> > Recently we had an upgrade to 12 Stable. Immediately after, we have started
> > seeing some strange connection esta
8 July 2019, 17:12:21, by "Michael Tuexen" :
> > On 8. Jul 2019, at 15:24, Paul wrote:
> >
> > Hi Michael,
> >
> > 8 July 2019, 15:53:15, by "Michael Tuexen" :
> >
> >>> On 8. Jul 2019, at 12:37, Paul wrote:
> &
Hi Michael,
9 July 2019, 15:34:29, by "Michael Tuexen" :
>
>
> > On 8. Jul 2019, at 17:22, Paul wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > 8 July 2019, 17:12:21, by "Michael Tuexen" :
> >
> >>> On 8. Jul 2019, at 15:24, Paul wrote
> Please find a patch in https://reviews.freebsd.org/D20980
>
> If possible, please test and report.
>
> Best regards
> Michael
> >
> >
> > I'm using FreeBSD 12 on my desktop and can confirm problem occur with some
> > hosts.
> >
> >
>
/net/intel-ixl-kmod): ixl-1.11.9
Help with this matter would be really appreciated.
Best regards,
-Paul
___
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"
8, timeout 0
Non-2xx or 3xx responses: 43616
Requests/sec: 4318.26
Transfer/sec: 1.25MB
Do note, that, not only multiple queues cause issues they also dramatically
decrease the performance of the network.
Using `sysctl -w net.inet.tcp.ts_offset_per_conn=0` didn't help at all.
Best regards,
-Paul
___
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"
19 October 2019, 19:35:24, by "Michael Tuexen"
:
> > On 19. Oct 2019, at 18:09, Paul wrote:
> >
> > Hi Michael,
> >
> > Thank you, for taking your time!
> >
> > We use physical machines. We don not have any special `pf` rules.
>
he problem went away
> when I connected the two machines with a cable, bypassing the network.
> Might be worth a try, if you can do it?
>
> Good luck with it, rick
>
> ____
> From: owner-freebsd-...@freebsd.org on behalf
> of Paul
eciate any advice anybody can give me. I've
included some information below which may help diagnose the problem.
Thanks,
Paul
// uname -a
FreeBSD darkstar.home 6.0-RELEASE FreeBSD 6.0-RELEASE #0: Thu Nov 3
09:36:13 UTC 2005
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC i386
// ifco
On 12/31/05, Bill Vermillion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I know you'll find this hard to believe, but on Sat, Dec 31, 2005
> at 02:52 , Paul actually admitted to saying:
>
> > I've just installed FreeBSD 6.0 Release yesterday, I've spend the last
> &g
p.
Julian, if not this, then what use cases were you acting from when giving
interfaces a FIB in the first place?
Vixie
Sent from Workspace ONE Boxer
On Dec 30, 2024 08:06, Julian Elischer wrote:
On 12/24/24 1:06 PM, Jamie Landeg-Jones wrote:
> Paul Vixie wrote:
>
>> i&
ed maste pointed me here after he saw me post the following on twixter:
>
to be clear, i can fix this and submit a patch, but won't if there ar
You don't need L2 for this. The firewall pattern when your bare metal host has
an address in the vlan you use for guests is:
Allow the specific things you want the bare metal host to do;
Deny all else involving the bare metal host;
Allow all else involving the guest subnet.
p vixie
l(4) which is a real possibility, it supports 'VLAN
tag insertion/extraction'.
Has anyone done this? Does anyone have any pointers to accomplish this?
Thanks,
Paul
--
__
:(){ :|:& };:
On Wed, Apr 17, 2024 at 10:04 PM Lexi Winter wrote:
> Paul Procacci:
> > I'm assigning VF's to bhyve with pci passthru.
> [...]
> > Given this, I figured the best option would be to set the VLAN on the VF
> on
> > the host prior to handing it off to the
agreed. and one of my mods to the ultrix (~4.3bsd) kernel for
gatekeeper.dec.com back in ~1990 was to use the result of gethostid(3)
if that result was nonzero and if a socket was not already bound. so
named(8) and ntpd(8) and anything else that used explicit binding got
what they expected, but
i think it's not too soon for the bsd community to become less
reactionary. (yes, i know that's ironic coming from me.)
https://nomadbsd.org/
i'd like freebsd to be fit for a lot of purposes. a complete OS is one
of those that i will use the most. but not the only one for me, and not
the only
<>
That's been a very workable system.
p vixie
On May 17, 2024 21:32, "Rodney W. Grimes" wrote:
> Scott writes:
> > Anyway, fun's over. Perhaps this is a greater lesson that the Foundation
> > provide the rules under which code is added or removed from base and then
> > we'd all be
with "add pass udp" one creates a rule that permits initial fragments of a
datagram, or unfragmented datagram, to pass. if this doesn't happen, then no
subsequent fragment will matter even if allowed through -- because there will
be no endpoint state to allow those fragments to be reassembled. s
le the `problem' occurs.
My guess is packets are getting shuttled between a global taskqueue thread.
This is the default, or at least I'm not aware of this default being
changed.
You can try enabling `options RSS' in your kernel as this would introduce a
taskqueue worker thread per cpu.
~Paul
--
__
:(){ :|:& };:
5 priority 128 path cost 200
member: em0 flags=143
ifmaxaddr 0 port 1 priority 128 path cost 2
vboxnet0: flags=8802 metric 0 mtu 1500
ether 0a:00:27:00:00:00
Thanks!
Paul Schenkeveld
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org ma
ose and is quite
clean IMO. It's also not necessary to run multiple server processes
(like sshd, sendmail, httpd) for every routing domain.
With kind regards,
Paul Schenkeveld
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/li
ss: 00:14:4f:25:ca:13
Jan 22 14:04:33 lucid kernel: cas3: [FILTER]
The following are attached:
/var/run/dmesg.boot
dmesg output after the second attempt to load the cas driver.
/var/log/messages after the second attemp to load the cas driver.
--
Paul Keusemann
On 01/24/13 09:09, Marius Strobl wrote:
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 02:46:48PM -0600, Paul Keusemann wrote:
Hi,
I've got a Dell R200 which I'm trying to build into a gateway with a Sun
QGE (501-6738-10). The cas driver fails to load the first time I try to
load it but succeeds the s
On 01/24/13 15:50, Marius Strobl wrote:
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 12:39:44PM -0600, Paul Keusemann wrote:
On 01/24/13 09:09, Marius Strobl wrote:
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 02:46:48PM -0600, Paul Keusemann wrote:
Hi,
I've got a Dell R200 which I'm trying to build into a gateway with
On 01/25/13 17:34, Marius Strobl wrote:
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 01:14:51PM -0600, Paul Keusemann wrote:
On 01/25/13 10:19, Marius Strobl wrote:
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 08:48:04PM -0600, Paul Keusemann wrote:
On 01/24/13 15:50, Marius Strobl wrote:
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 12:39:44PM -0600
routers (some direct Ethernet
link, some via VDSL) and have upgraded to the latest IOS in an attempt
to make this work, nothing changes.
Have also tried with 7.2-RELEASE in case it was an 8.X issue - again,
same problem seen.
Any hints to help debug this (from either end) would be much appreciated.
gt; 14:59:44.059739 d8:d3:85:c1:5e:ed > 54:75:d0:38:ca:7a, ethertype PPPoE S
> (0x8864), length 26: PPPoE [ses 0x21] LCP (0xc021), length 6: LCP, Term-Ack
> (0x06), id 2, length 6
> 14:59:44.060925 54:75:d0:38:ca:7a > d8:d3:85:c1:5e:ed, ethertype PPPoE D
> (0x8863), length 60: PP
1 - 100 of 431 matches
Mail list logo
