On Tue, 17 Jul 2007, Max Laier wrote:
[ Excess CC-list ... testers needed!!! ]
On Tuesday 17 July 2007, Robert Watson wrote:
Dear all:
This is a reminder e-mail that, in the very near future, Giant
compatibility shims for network protocols will be removed.
<...>
The *only* remainin
On Fri, 20 Jul 2007, Paul Allen wrote:
From Julian Elischer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Fri, Jul 20, 2007 at 11:36:50AM -0700:
Robert Watson wrote:
On Tue, 17 Jul 2007, Max Laier wrote:
So far I have had 0 (zero) reports of problems since this thread began.
Could people using uid/gid/jail
On Fri, 20 Jul 2007, Julian Elischer wrote:
Robert Watson wrote:
On Tue, 17 Jul 2007, Max Laier wrote:
So far I have had 0 (zero) reports of problems since this thread began.
Could people using uid/gid/jail rules with ipfw or pf on 7.x *please* try
running their firewalls without
Date: Monday 29 September 2008
From: Robert Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dear all:
Although it didn't show up in 8.x testing to date, it turned out there was a
serious stability regression in the ipfw uid/gid/jail rule implementation as a
result of moving to rwloc
On Tue, 30 Sep 2008, Max Laier wrote:
On Tuesday 30 September 2008 00:02:04 Robert Watson wrote:
On Mon, 29 Sep 2008, Max Laier wrote:
Please help testing. It's been confirmed to work for IPFW, let's make
sure pf is in good shape, too. Thanks.
A casual glance at pf.c suggests
On Thu, 13 Aug 2009, Tom Uffner wrote:
i'm hoping a few people will give me estimates on what kind of throughput i
should theoretically expect before i provide any actual test data.
also, any suggestions on tuning would be welcome.
so far in preliminary tests, enabling polling on the network
On Tue, 16 May 2006, JINMEI Tatuya / [ISO-2022-JP] ¿ÀÌÀãºÈ wrote:
So, if a program needs to specify an arbitrary source IPv6 address for
outgoing packets, it should use other "packet injection" interface such as
BPF.
One problem with using BPF for packet injection in IPv4 is that it requires
