--- On Fri, 8/8/08, Oliver Fromme <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From: Oliver Fromme <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: sysinstall compilation issue
> To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Date: Friday, August 8, 2008, 9:36 PM
> Unga <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > This is i386 RELENG_
Hi,
Since I added IPv6 to my network, and started really using it, I'm seeing
some strange things happening.
For instance, I'm on machine 2a01:678:1:443::443, and I do :
$ traceroute6 -n 2a01:678:100:2::
traceroute6 to 2a01:678:100:2:: (2a01:678:100:2::) from
2a01:678:1:443::443, 64 hops max, 12
On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 09:45:48AM +0200, Mathieu Arnold wrote:
> Since I added IPv6 to my network, and started really using it, I'm seeing
> some strange things happening.
>
> For instance, I'm on machine 2a01:678:1:443::443, and I do :
>
> $ traceroute6 -n 2a01:678:100:2::
> traceroute6 to 2a01
2008/8/11 John Baldwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Monday 11 August 2008 12:35:17 pm pluknet wrote:
>> 2008/8/11 John Baldwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> > On Saturday 09 August 2008 07:16:37 am Ulrich Spoerlein wrote:
>> >> Hi John,
>> >>
>> >> I now figured out the "who", the "why" still eludes me.
>>
On Aug 12, 2008, at 12:12 AM, Ivan Voras wrote:
Borja Marcos wrote:
Hello,
I'm running a server with FreeBSD 7-STABLE as of August 8, Apache
2.2 with mpm/worker and threads support, and PHP 5.2.6.
Everything works like a charm, but I see that Apache is leaking
processes that get stuck in u
On Mon, 11 Aug 2008, Mike Tancsa wrote:
At 05:21 PM 8/8/2008, Robert Watson wrote:
http://www.watson.org/~robert/freebsd/netperf/20080808-7stable-rwlock-inpcb.diff
These incude the inpcb/inpcbinfo read/write locking changes (although not
yet for raw/divert sockets). Any testing, especially
On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 12:17:05PM +0200, Borja Marcos wrote:
>
> On Aug 12, 2008, at 12:12 AM, Ivan Voras wrote:
>
>> Borja Marcos wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>> I'm running a server with FreeBSD 7-STABLE as of August 8, Apache
>>> 2.2 with mpm/worker and threads support, and PHP 5.2.6.
>>> Everything wo
Hi Folks,
I'm using lagg(4) on some of our servers and I'm just wondering how the
failover is implemented.
The manpage isn't quite clear:
failover Sends and receives traffic only through the master port.
If
the master port becomes unavailable, the next active port
is
On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 12:37:15PM +0200, Marian Hettwer wrote:
> I'm using lagg(4) on some of our servers and I'm just wondering how the
> failover is implemented.
> The manpage isn't quite clear:
>
> failover Sends and receives traffic only through the master port.
> If
>
Hi,
On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 21:37, Edward Ruggeri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I recently purchased a Lenovo ThinkPad with a ThinkPad 11a/b/g
> Wireless LAN Mini Express Adapter (based on the AR5212 chipset). I
> got kernel panics while using the wireless card under 7-STABLE
Do you still have t
> Since I added IPv6 to my network, and started really using it, I'm seeing
> some strange things happening.
>
> For instance, I'm on machine 2a01:678:1:443::443, and I do :
>
> $ traceroute6 -n 2a01:678:100:2::
> traceroute6 to 2a01:678:100:2:: (2a01:678:100:2::) from
> 2a01:678:1:443::443, 64 hop
On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 18:55:52 +0800, Eugene Grosbein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 12:37:15PM +0200, Marian Hettwer wrote:
>
>> I'm using lagg(4) on some of our servers and I'm just wondering how the
>> failover is implemented.
>> The manpage isn't quite clear:
>>
>> f
+-le 12.08.2008 01:34:03 -0700, Jeremy Chadwick a dit :
| Important note: I know absolutely nothing about IPv6.
|
| Do you have ACLs on any of these machines? !A in traceroute commonly
| means there's an ACL blocking said packets:
|
| !A (communication with destination network administratively
On 2008-Aug-12 18:55:52 +0800, Eugene Grosbein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 12:37:15PM +0200, Marian Hettwer wrote:
>
>> I'm using lagg(4) on some of our servers and I'm just wondering how the
>> failover is implemented.
As far as I can tell, not especially well :-(. It doe
> However, IMO lacp doesn't solve that problem. lacp is used for link
> aggregation, not failover.
It does both - if one of the links becomes unavailable then it will
stop using it. We use this for failover and it works fine, the only
caveat being that your LACP device at the far end needs to look
On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 01:17:27PM +0200, Mathieu Arnold wrote:
> +-le 12.08.2008 01:34:03 -0700, Jeremy Chadwick a dit :
> | Important note: I know absolutely nothing about IPv6.
> |
> | Do you have ACLs on any of these machines? !A in traceroute commonly
> | means there's an ACL blocking said p
+-le 12.08.2008 13:17:27 +0200, Mathieu Arnold a dit :
| +-le 12.08.2008 01:34:03 -0700, Jeremy Chadwick a dit :
|| Important note: I know absolutely nothing about IPv6.
||
|| Do you have ACLs on any of these machines? !A in traceroute commonly
|| means there's an ACL blocking said packets:
||
+-le 12.08.2008 12:02:42 +0100, Pete French a dit :
|> Since I added IPv6 to my network, and started really using it, I'm seeing
|> some strange things happening.
|>
|> For instance, I'm on machine 2a01:678:1:443::443, and I do :
|>
|> $ traceroute6 -n 2a01:678:100:2::
|> traceroute6 to 2a01:678:
On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 01:34:35PM +0200, Mathieu Arnold wrote:
>
>
> +-le 12.08.2008 13:17:27 +0200, Mathieu Arnold a dit :
> | +-le 12.08.2008 01:34:03 -0700, Jeremy Chadwick a dit :
> || Important note: I know absolutely nothing about IPv6.
> ||
> || Do you have ACLs on any of these machines?
> As far as I can tell, not especially well :-(. It doesn't seem to detect
> much short of layer 1 failure. In particular, shutting down the switch
> port will not trigger a failover.
Are you using bce devices as your phsyical interfaces ? Take a look at
the thread from last week about ifconfig
+-le 12.08.2008 04:31:23 -0700, Jeremy Chadwick a dit :
| Sorry if it sounds like I'm doubting you, but !A really looks like an
| ACL thing.
Oh, and in traceroute(8), !A is "!A (communication with destination network
administratively prohibited", which is just right from your point of view,
but,
Hi Pete,
On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 12:30:12 +0100, Pete French
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> However, IMO lacp doesn't solve that problem. lacp is used for link
>> aggregation, not failover.
>
> It does both - if one of the links becomes unavailable then it will
> stop using it. We use this for failove
+-le 12.08.2008 04:36:57 -0700, Jeremy Chadwick a dit :
| A pass on RELENG_7 will still cause state to be kept (keep state is
| implicit on RELENG_7).
the gateway is a 6.2 ;-)
| Do you see state mismatches? pfctl -s info.
There are some, but, hum
searches408816380699
> For what it's worth, I have a T60 that dual boots 6.3-R/amd64 and 7.0-R/i386
> and neither install has this problem. I can cold boot it with the NIC
> unplugged, plug in a cable, I get a link light and ifconfig em0 goes to
> active, dhclient em0 gets an IP successfully.
>
Did you try to ru
> Hum, 2a01:678:1:443::443 is a /64, and 2a01:678:100:2:: is on a /48, both
> have the "same" gateway, that is, the same box, which has :
> inet6 2a01:678:1:443:: prefixlen 64
> inet6 2a01:678:100:: prefixlen 48
O.K., that should work. My best advice here is to do what I did - whic
On Tuesday 12 August 2008 13:43:29 Marian Hettwer wrote:
> Hi Pete,
>
> On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 12:30:12 +0100, Pete French
>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> However, IMO lacp doesn't solve that problem. lacp is used for link
> >> aggregation, not failover.
> >
> > It does both - if one of the links
+-le 12.08.2008 04:36:57 -0700, Jeremy Chadwick a dit :
| A pass on RELENG_7 will still cause state to be kept (keep state is
| implicit on RELENG_7).
I've just tried doing pfctl -d, and not help, I *really* don't believe that
it's a pf problem ;-)
--
Mathieu Arnold
pgp0e94czU8F1.pgp
Descriptio
On 2008-Aug-12 13:43:29 +0200, Marian Hettwer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> lagg is to handle failover at the physical layer for when one of your
>> ether ports fails, or someone unplugs a cable. If I understand you
>>
>Thats unfortunate...
I tend to agree.
>bonding in Linux is capable of doing t
On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 02:01:45PM +0200, Mathieu Arnold wrote:
> +-le 12.08.2008 04:36:57 -0700, Jeremy Chadwick a dit :
> | A pass on RELENG_7 will still cause state to be kept (keep state is
> | implicit on RELENG_7).
>
> I've just tried doing pfctl -d, and not help, I *really* don't believe th
+-le 12.08.2008 12:50:35 +0100, Pete French a dit :
|> Hum, 2a01:678:1:443::443 is a /64, and 2a01:678:100:2:: is on a /48, both
|> have the "same" gateway, that is, the same box, which has :
|> inet6 2a01:678:1:443:: prefixlen 64
|> inet6 2a01:678:100:: prefixlen 48
|
| O.K., that
Hi Max,
On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 14:00:18 +0200, Max Laier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Thats unfortunate...
>> bonding in Linux is capable of doing this and solaris too.
>> Well then. At least everythings clear now. And in the end, clarifing
> things
>> was the reason for that mail thread :)
>
> You
+-le 12.08.2008 05:10:05 -0700, Jeremy Chadwick a dit :
| On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 02:01:45PM +0200, Mathieu Arnold wrote:
|> +-le 12.08.2008 04:36:57 -0700, Jeremy Chadwick a dit :
|> | A pass on RELENG_7 will still cause state to be kept (keep state is
|> | implicit on RELENG_7).
|>
|> I've jus
Hi Peter,
On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 22:03:07 +1000, Peter Jeremy
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 2008-Aug-12 13:43:29 +0200, Marian Hettwer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> lagg is to handle failover at the physical layer for when one of your
>>> ether ports fails, or someone unplugs a cable. If I underst
> The network is pretty simple,
>
> gateway :
> em0: flags=8843 mtu 1500
> options=b
> inet6 fe80::207:e9ff:fe0e:dead%em0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x1
> inet6 2a01:678:1:443:: prefixlen 64
> inet6 2a01:678:100:: prefixlen 48
Hmmm, are machine numbers of all zeroes le
On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 5:34 AM, Thomas Zander
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 21:37, Edward Ruggeri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I recently purchased a Lenovo ThinkPad with a ThinkPad 11a/b/g
>> Wireless LAN Mini Express Adapter (based on the AR5212 chipset). I
>>
On Tuesday 12 August 2008 13:35:33 Mathieu Arnold wrote:
> +-le 12.08.2008 12:02:42 +0100, Pete French a dit :
> |> Since I added IPv6 to my network, and started really using it, I'm
> |> seeing some strange things happening.
> |>
> |> For instance, I'm on machine 2a01:678:1:443::443, and I do :
>
+-le 12.08.2008 13:26:00 +0100, Pete French a dit :
|> The network is pretty simple,
|>
|> gateway :
|> em0: flags=8843 mtu 1500
|> options=b
|> inet6 fe80::207:e9ff:fe0e:dead%em0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x1
|> inet6 2a01:678:1:443:: prefixlen 64
|> inet6 2a01:678:10
On Tuesday 12 August 2008 02:42:52 am Johan Kuuse wrote:
> On Monday 11 August 2008 23:04:30 John Baldwin wrote:
> > On Sunday 10 August 2008 10:01:49 pm Johan Kuuse wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I am a kgdb newbie, so please be patient.
> > > I suspect (just based on the fact that this is the 4th t
+-le 12.08.2008 14:53:00 +0200, Mathieu Arnold a dit :
| I'll investigate.
Ok, I rebooted the gateway, and now, it works just as it should...
Maybe once upon a time, I did something strange, which borked everything...
Anyway, thanks all :-)
--
Mathieu Arnold
pgpFAKhbnBRan.pgp
Description: PGP
+-le 12.08.2008 14:53:24 +0200, Max Laier a dit :
|> 2a01:678:1:443::443 > 2a01:678:100:2::: ICMP6, echo request, seq 0, length
|> 16 fe80::207:e9ff:fe0e:dead > ff02::1:ff00:0: ICMP6, neighbor solicitation,
|> who has 2a01:678:100:2::, length 32
|> fe80::207:e9ff:fe0e:dead > 2a01:678:1:443::443: IC
On Tuesday 12 August 2008 04:36:29 am pluknet wrote:
> 2008/8/11 John Baldwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > On Monday 11 August 2008 12:35:17 pm pluknet wrote:
> >> 2008/8/11 John Baldwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >> > On Saturday 09 August 2008 07:16:37 am Ulrich Spoerlein wrote:
> >> >> Hi John,
> >> >>
On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 12:37:15PM +0200, Marian Hettwer wrote:
> Hi Folks,
>
> I'm using lagg(4) on some of our servers and I'm just wondering how the
> failover is implemented.
> The manpage isn't quite clear:
>
> failover Sends and receives traffic only through the master port.
> If
On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 09:24:30PM +1000, Peter Jeremy wrote:
> On 2008-Aug-12 18:55:52 +0800, Eugene Grosbein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 12:37:15PM +0200, Marian Hettwer wrote:
> >
> >> I'm using lagg(4) on some of our servers and I'm just wondering how the
> >> failover
NOTICE:
when I run purepw it is located and runned, but
when I run pure-pw (NOTICE: dash in name) I get: Command not found
kes# env |grep PATH
PATH=/sbin:/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin:/usr/games:/usr/local/sbin:/usr/local/bin:/root/bin
kes# env | grep PATH
PATH=/sbin:/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin:/usr/games:
> On Tuesday 12 August 2008 02:42:52 am Johan Kuuse wrote:
>> On Monday 11 August 2008 23:04:30 John Baldwin wrote:
>> > On Sunday 10 August 2008 10:01:49 pm Johan Kuuse wrote:
>> > > Hi,
>> > >
>> > > I am a kgdb newbie, so please be patient.
>> > > I suspect (just based on the fact that this is t
On Tuesday 12 August 2008 02:23:30 pm Johan Kuuse wrote:
> > On Tuesday 12 August 2008 02:42:52 am Johan Kuuse wrote:
> >> On Monday 11 August 2008 23:04:30 John Baldwin wrote:
> >> > On Sunday 10 August 2008 10:01:49 pm Johan Kuuse wrote:
> >> > > Hi,
> >> > >
> >> > > I am a kgdb newbie, so pleas
On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 1:04 AM, Daniel O'Connor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
> I have a 6.3 (RELENG_6 a bit past 6.3 actually) system which hangs when
> I try and reboot (or shutdown). It has a Supermicro C2SBA+, 2ware
> 9650SE and Core2Duo CPU.
>
> It shuts down as normal except after printin
On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 10:00:02PM +0400, KES wrote:
> NOTICE:
> when I run purepw it is located and runned, but
> when I run pure-pw (NOTICE: dash in name) I get: Command not found
Did you by any chance just install this binary? Have you tried running
'rehash' and trying again?
Brix
--
Henrik
Jeremy Chadwick pisze:
On Mon, Aug 11, 2008 at 04:45:47PM -0700, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
I don't need an API, but this kind of statement makes Intel sound like
they're not willing to disclose the SMBus offsets for monitoring. I
might have to look at lm-sensors from Linux, but that code is very
d
On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 10:38:11PM +0200, Eugene Butusov wrote:
> Jeremy Chadwick pisze:
>> On Mon, Aug 11, 2008 at 04:45:47PM -0700, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
>>> I don't need an API, but this kind of statement makes Intel sound like
>>> they're not willing to disclose the SMBus offsets for monitorin
- Forwarded message from KES <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -
> From: KES <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 23:40:08 +0400
> Subject: Re: command not found: problem with dash in filenames
>
>
>
> 12.08.08, 22:25, "Jeremy Chadwick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > On
--- On Tue, 8/12/08, Unga <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From: Unga <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: sysinstall compilation issue
> To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Date: Tuesday, August 12, 2008, 3:28 PM
> --- On Fri, 8/8/08, Oliver Fromme
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
52 matches
Mail list logo