Re: TCP_DEFER_ACCEPT issues

fwiw i also brought the TCP_DEFER_ACCEPT problems up the end of last year: http://www.mail-archive.com/netdev@vger.kernel.org/msg28916.html it's possible the final message in that thread is how we should define the behaviour, i haven't tried the TCP_SYNCNT idea though. -dean - To unsubscribe fr

Re: TCP_DEFER_ACCEPT brokenness?

ping. i received no response on this one.. thanks -dean On Sat, 30 Dec 2006, dean gaudet wrote: > hi... i'm having troubles matching up the tcp(7) man page description of > TCP_DEFER_ACCEPT versus some comments in the kernel (2.6.20-rc2) versus > how the kernel actually acts

Re: why would EPIPE cause socket port to change?

On Tue, 23 Jan 2007, David Miller wrote: > From: dean gaudet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 12:11:01 -0800 (PST) > > > libnss-ldap has some code which attempts to determine if its private > > socket has been trampled on in between calls to the librar

Re: why would EPIPE cause socket port to change?

On Tue, 23 Jan 2007, Rick Jones wrote: > Herbert Xu wrote: > > Prior to the last write, the socket entered the CLOSED state meaning > > that the old port is no longer allocated to it. As a result, the > > last write operates on an unconnected socket which causes a new local > > port to be allocat

why would EPIPE cause socket port to change?

in the test program below the getsockname result on a TCP socket changes across a write which produces EPIPE... here's a fragment of the strace: getsockname(3, {sa_family=AF_INET, sin_port=htons(37636), sin_addr=inet_addr("127.0.0.1")}, [17863593746633850896]) = 0 ... write(3, "hi!\n", 4)

TCP_DEFER_ACCEPT brokenness?

hi... i'm having troubles matching up the tcp(7) man page description of TCP_DEFER_ACCEPT versus some comments in the kernel (2.6.20-rc2) versus how the kernel actually acts. the man page says this: TCP_DEFER_ACCEPT Allows a listener to be awakened only when data arrives on t

Re: [patch] ifb double-counts packets

On Sat, 23 Dec 2006, jamal wrote: > On Sat, 2006-23-12 at 02:35 -0800, dean gaudet wrote: > > it seems that ifb counts packets twice... both at xmit time and also in > > the tasklet. i'm not sure which one of the two to drop, but here's a > > patch for dro

[patch] ifb double-counts packets

it seems that ifb counts packets twice... both at xmit time and also in the tasklet. i'm not sure which one of the two to drop, but here's a patch for dropping the counting at xmit time. patch against 2.6.20-rc1. -dean Signed-off-by: dean gaudet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Index: l

Re: gratuitous arp

On Sun, 26 Nov 2006, James Courtier-Dutton wrote: > dean gaudet wrote: > > On Sun, 26 Nov 2006, James Courtier-Dutton wrote: > > > > > dean gaudet wrote: > > > > hi... > > > > > > > > i ran into some problems recently which would have

Re: gratuitous arp

On Sun, 26 Nov 2006, James Courtier-Dutton wrote: > dean gaudet wrote: > > hi... > > > > i ran into some problems recently which would have been avoided if my box > > did a gratuitous arp as it brought up all interfaces (the router took > > forever to time

gratuitous arp

hi... i ran into some problems recently which would have been avoided if my box did a gratuitous arp as it brought up all interfaces (the router took forever to timeout the ARP entries for interface aliases). so i set about looking to see why that wasn't happening. i either missed it, or ther

Re: mii-tool gigabit support.

On Wed, 27 Sep 2006, Auke Kok wrote: > dean gaudet wrote: > > On Tue, 26 Sep 2006, Jeff Garzik wrote: > > > > > Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > > > The mii-tool utility seems to be abandoned and unmaintained? > > > > > > >

Re: mii-tool gigabit support.

On Tue, 26 Sep 2006, Jeff Garzik wrote: > Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > The mii-tool utility seems to be abandoned and unmaintained? > > > > Here is a version that does standard 1000baseT support. > > http://developer.osdl.org/shemminger/prototypes/mii-tool.tar.bz2 > > Not really. I would ra

Re: mii-tool gigabit support.

On Tue, 26 Sep 2006, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > The mii-tool utility seems to be abandoned and unmaintained? > > Here is a version that does standard 1000baseT support. > http://developer.osdl.org/shemminger/prototypes/mii-tool.tar.bz2 cool that's bugged me for a while... there's an off-b

[patch] SFQ "noports" and "nosrcip" support and hash revamp

his patch included upstream so i can eliminate a patch from several of my kernels. thanks -dean p.s. sorry for the attachments, but there's two packages being patched here... Signed-off-by: dean gaudet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>diff -pru -X linux-2.6.14.4/Documentation/dontdiff linux-2.6.