ctnetlink needs large socket buffer sizes. To avoid increasing
the system wide limit we would like to have something that allows
CAP_NET_ADMIN to override these limits. The first idea was to
change the SO_{SND,RCV}BUF behaviour, but since a valid way of
getting the largest possible size is to use
I apologize for my misconfigured email client, this is my correct
address
PS machine rebuilds suck.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Jesse Brandeburg
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a mess
Hi David,
Please consider pulling from:
rsync://rsync.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/acme/net-2.6.git/
--
- Arnaldo
tree b2d1a14c34bd0880d421a31a909de6a9c2400f75
parent 18cdbd737f99ac20a3cd9a700d5f616a7db2ebd1
author Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 1121896161 -0300
commi
Hi David,
Please consider pulling from:
rsync://rsync.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/acme/net-2.6.git/
--
- Arnaldo
tree 4895b1a30679afb60aff33bcbba03506380364f7
parent f60f700876cd51de9de69f3a3c865d95e287a24d
author Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 1121671485 -0300
commi
please use netdev@vger.kernel.org
On Tue, 19 Jul 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I'm confused about the drop count reporting in e1000
> nics (and elsewhere). On e1000 nics the on nic rx buffer
> drop counts are maintained in "mpc" and the in kernel buffer drops
> are maintained in "rnbc".
Ac
Wensong Zhang wrote:
Well, I hope IPVS people will take care of this. I don't really know
that code too well...
This bit is only to indicate that the sk_buff is already mangled by
IPVS/NAT, so that when both iptables/NAT and IPVS/NAT are enabled,
iptables/NAT will not mangle sk_buff again. I
Fixed and tested flow_cache_lookup per previous comments.
Verified that failed authorization results in new resolution
correctly.
Note that the previous [PATCH 2/2] applies (only resending one
patch now). The SELinux LSM handles the case when the context
is null.
Regards,
Trent.
=
All 3 patches applied, thanks Harald.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
From: Harald Welte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2005 09:23:05 -0400
> On Mon, Jul 18, 2005 at 08:31:45PM -0700, David S. Miller wrote:
> > From: Harald Welte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2005 00:04:51 +0200
> >
> > > The only real in-tree user of nfcache was IPVS, who only n
Hello,
I set up IPSec tunnel and iptables as follows:
iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -o eth0 -j MASQUERADE
spdadd 172.27.210.0/24 172.27.86.0/24 any -P in ipsec
esp/tunnel/172.27.1.3-172.27.1.10/require
ah/tunnel/172.27.1.3-172.27.1.10/require;
spdadd 172.27.86.
Hi,
Sorry for the delay.
On Wed, 20 Jul 2005, Harald Welte wrote:
On Mon, Jul 18, 2005 at 08:31:45PM -0700, David S. Miller wrote:
From: Harald Welte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2005 00:04:51 +0200
The only real in-tree user of nfcache was IPVS, who only needs a single
bit. Unfo
On Maw, 2005-07-19 at 15:55 +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> VIA_VELOCITY=y and INET=n results in the following compile error:
>
> <-- snip -->
>
> ...
> LD .tmp_vmlinux1
> drivers/built-in.o: In function `velocity_register_notifier':
> via-velocity.c:(.text+0x3462c6): undefined reference to
Hi Dave,
here comes the nfnetlink layer. Its first user (ctnetlink) is waiting
for some last review and will follow tomorrow.
Please apply to your 2.6.14 tree, thanks!
--
- Harald Welte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://netfilter.org/
Hi Dave,
I'm now starting to send the accumulated netfilter patches. For now
there will be three (event notifiers, nfnetlink, nfc_defines). Tomorrow
some more (ctnetlink, with some luck nfnetlink_queue and the
pptp-helper) will follow.
Please apply to your 2.6.14 tree, thanks!
--
- Harald W
Hi Dave,
we have to re-add the NFC_ defines to the header files, otherwise old
userspace code (such as old versions of the iptables program) will fail
to compile :(
Please apply to your 2.6.14 tree, thanks!
--
- Harald Welte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://netfilter.org/
==
On Mon, Jul 18, 2005 at 08:31:45PM -0700, David S. Miller wrote:
> From: Harald Welte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2005 00:04:51 +0200
>
> > The only real in-tree user of nfcache was IPVS, who only needs a single
> > bit. Unfortunately I couldn't find some other free bit in sk_buff to
16 matches
Mail list logo