Marc Lehmann wrote:
> It's also a 64-bit-only problem. To verify, I tried this:
>
> ethtool -K eth1 rx off tx off sg off
>
> Where eth1 is the interface where pppoe runs over.
>
> ethtool -k eth1 then displayed:
>
>rx-checksumming: off
>tx-checksumming: off
>scatter-gather: off
>
Marc Lehmann wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 11:42:01PM +0200, Patrick McHardy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
>>just to give some hints, does this patch make the problem go away?
>
> I guess now that hw checksumming is identified as the direct cause, this is
> no longer neecssary? If yes, just
On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 11:42:01PM +0200, Patrick McHardy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> > Some more messages I get when logging is enabled:
> >
> > printk: 1286 messages suppressed.
> > ip_ct_tcp: invalid state IN= OUT= SRC=84.56.231.206 DST=xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx
> > LEN=52 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID
On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 11:34:10PM +0200, Patrick McHardy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> > I think I have the LOG target compiled into the kernel. After the echo, I
> > got
> > this within a matter of seconds:
> >
> >printk: 614 messages suppressed.
> >ip_ct_tcp: bad TCP checksum IN= OUT=
Marc Lehmann wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 02:39:20PM +0200, Patrick McHardy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
>>Please try if loading the ipt_LOG module and executing
>>"echo 255 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/netfilter/ip_conntrack_log_invalid"
>>gives more information
>
> Some more messages I get when
Marc Lehmann wrote:
> I think I have the LOG target compiled into the kernel. After the echo, I got
> this within a matter of seconds:
>
>printk: 614 messages suppressed.
>ip_ct_tcp: bad TCP checksum IN= OUT= SRC= DST=84.56.231.206
> LEN=105 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=53 ID=33989
On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 02:39:20PM +0200, Patrick McHardy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Please try if loading the ipt_LOG module and executing
> "echo 255 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/netfilter/ip_conntrack_log_invalid"
> gives more information
Some more messages I get when logging is enabled:
printk: 12
On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 02:39:20PM +0200, Patrick McHardy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Andrew Morton wrote:
Thanks for your response!
> > tcp 6 52 SYN_SENT src=10.0.0.1 dst=129.13.162.95 sport=44320
> > dport=80 [UNREPLIED] src=129.13.162.95 dst=84.56.237.68 sport=80
> > dport=44320
Andrew Morton wrote:
I recently upgraded a 32 bit machine to a new amd64 board+cpu. I took the
same kernel (2.6.13-rc7) and just recompiled it for 64 bit, plus upgraded
userspace to 64 bit.
Firewall config stayed the same.
Problem: neither ping nor tcp was being masqueraded properly. I created
Begin forwarded message:
Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2005 19:29:30 +0200
From: Marc Lehmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: masquerading failure for at least icmp and tcp+sack on amd64
Hi!
I recently upgraded a 32 bit machine to a new amd64 board+cpu. I took the
same kernel
10 matches
Mail list logo