Re: Packet interception / Mangling
Hi Isnt pcap meant to be non-intrusive, as in it only gets sent a copy of the packet from the kernel space to userspace? And doesnt actually intercept anything? Thanks for the other suggestions, but im trying to stay away from divert sockets, a friend also suggested libdnet, so I'll look into that today, but if you have any further ideas, please let me know, thanks Regards /Cole - Original Message - From: "Julian Elischer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2005 2:39 AM Subject: Re: Packet interception / Mangling > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > >Hi > > > >I wanted to know if there are any libraries similar to pcap to intercept > >packets/mangle packets. > > > > > > how about pcap? :-) > > There are also two other mechinisms.. > "divert sockets" (man divert) which is used in conjuction with teh ipfw > packet fileter > and netgraph (man 4 netgraph, man ngctl, man ng_socket, man ng_ether) > which can do a lot of interesting thins. > > >What im trying to do specifically is like link compression, and I would then > >need to check if the packet is then compressed and decompress, and so forth > >and > >so on. > > > >I would like to avoid having to use a ipfw divert to a port, and specifically > >check all traffic to the box using a library function or some kind of hook > >into > >the kernel. > > > >The FreeBSD version I will be using is 4.9 or 4.11, and would like to know if > >there are any such routines available, and whether it could be a userland > >daemon, or if i am going to need to write a kernel loadable module? > > > >If anyone has any ideas or suggestions, or knows anything about this, it > >would > >be a great help. > > > >Regards > >/Cole > > > > > >___ > >freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list > >http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers > >To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" > > > > ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
ISCSI Beta
All, there was a posting from Danny Braniss in February with title iSCSI initiator driver beta version, testers wanted can someone please point me to the source. I would be very interessted in running some tests. -Andreas -- Weitersagen: GMX DSL-Flatrates mit Tempo-Garantie! Ab 4,99 Euro/Monat: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/dsl ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
/boot/loader bug?
As reported here (I hope - the moderator got the message) and in -questions, I have a motherboard that installs just fine, but gets a "Can't work out which disk we are booting fromm" message when the installed os boots. Hacking boot/i386/loader/main.c to wire the proper values into new_currdev fixed the problem. At this point, I'm considering filing a bug report - but I'm not sure where the bug is. Is this a /boot/loader bug, and it should have known what was going on? Is this a BIOS bug, in that it reported the wrong thing to /boot/loader? Is it a bug in one of the earlier boot stages? Anyone got any opinions on this? Any suggestions for things to look at to determine what component is actually buggy? Thanks, http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information. ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
pxe boot failure
Hello,
I'm trying to get pxeboot running without any success so far.
I get 'BTX halted' after a register dump showing an int 6.
I read almost anything, I could find about that problem.
I tried with/without LOADER_TFTP_SUPPORT, I uncommented
those delay() lines in pxe.c and enlarged the delays.
I even doubled some of the internal buffers.
The crash is always at different locations. The last
message usually is "pxe_open: gateway ip: 10.47.11.1".
Tcpdump shows no problems.
So am I just having a buggy boot prom?
My board has an intel 82559er chip and I was told
by the board's manufacturer, that linux pxeboot
does work fine, which not really helps. They have no
newer bios update and know nothing about pxe problems.
My environment is FreeBSD 4.11 with latest ISC dhcpd.
Here are my settings:
/usr/local/dhcpd.conf:
default-lease-time 600;
max-lease-time 7200;
ddns-update-style ad-hoc;
log-facility local7;
subnet 10.47.11.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 {
range dynamic-bootp 10.47.11.10 10.47.11.99;
option routers 10.47.11.1;
filename "pxeboot";
next-server 10.47.11.1;
option root-path "10.47.11.1:/usr/local/diskless_root";
}
/etc/inetd.conf (for LOADER_TFTP_SUPPORT=yes):
tftp dgram udp wait root /usr/libexec/tftpd tftpd -l -s
/usr/local/diskless_root
/etc/exports:
/usr -ro -maproot=0 -alldirs -network 10.47.11.00 -mask 255.255.255.0
BTW, booting via etherboot disk works. I just have to replace "pxeboot" with
"kernel"
in dhcpd.conf.
Any hints?
Thank you,
Norbert
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
ISCSI Beta
All, there was a posting from Danny Braniss in February with title iSCSI initiator driver beta version, testers wanted can someone please point me to the source. I would be very interessted in running some tests. -Andreas -- 5 GB Mailbox, 50 FreeSMS http://www.gmx.net/de/go/promail +++ GMX - die erste Adresse für Mail, Message, More +++ ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: /boot/loader bug?
On Monday 27 June 2005 06:49 pm, Mike Meyer wrote: > As reported here (I hope - the moderator got the message) and in > -questions, I have a motherboard that installs just fine, but gets a > "Can't work out which disk we are booting fromm" message when the > installed os boots. > > Hacking boot/i386/loader/main.c to wire the proper values into > new_currdev fixed the problem. At this point, I'm considering filing a > bug report - but I'm not sure where the bug is. > > Is this a /boot/loader bug, and it should have known what was going > on? Is this a BIOS bug, in that it reported the wrong thing to > /boot/loader? Is it a bug in one of the earlier boot stages? > > Anyone got any opinions on this? Any suggestions for things to look at > to determine what component is actually buggy? Your BIOS most likely. The output of 'lsdev' from your loader prompt might be helpful though. Also, what did you have to wire new_currdev to? -- John Baldwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ "Power Users Use the Power to Serve" = http://www.FreeBSD.org ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Packet interception / Mangling
Cole wrote: Hi Isnt pcap meant to be non-intrusive, as in it only gets sent a copy of the packet from the kernel space to userspace? And doesnt actually intercept anything? Thanks for the other suggestions, but im trying to stay away from divert sockets, Why? that's what they are for! It's like saying "I know I asked for a tool to remove this nut from the bolt but I'm trying to stay away from using wrenches". netgraph also allows you to do this in an efficient manner. a friend also suggested libdnet, so I'll look into that today, but if you have any further ideas, please let me know, thanks Regards /Cole - Original Message - From: "Julian Elischer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2005 2:39 AM Subject: Re: Packet interception / Mangling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi I wanted to know if there are any libraries similar to pcap to intercept packets/mangle packets. how about pcap? :-) There are also two other mechinisms.. "divert sockets" (man divert) which is used in conjuction with teh ipfw packet fileter and netgraph (man 4 netgraph, man ngctl, man ng_socket, man ng_ether) which can do a lot of interesting thins. What im trying to do specifically is like link compression, and I would then need to check if the packet is then compressed and decompress, and so forth and so on. I would like to avoid having to use a ipfw divert to a port, and specifically check all traffic to the box using a library function or some kind of hook into the kernel. The FreeBSD version I will be using is 4.9 or 4.11, and would like to know if there are any such routines available, and whether it could be a userland daemon, or if i am going to need to write a kernel loadable module? If anyone has any ideas or suggestions, or knows anything about this, it would be a great help. Regards /Cole ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Attention Mike Meyer
Mike, Your e-mail flapper (flagger?) doesn't work, so you aren't getting my replies regarding your /boot/loader problem. If you fix your e-mail so that it functions, perhaps I will be able to help you, but until then... -- John Baldwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ "Power Users Use the Power to Serve" = http://www.FreeBSD.org ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: problem handling POSIX thread on FreeBSD
Ok, I understand, but by being threads POSIX should be executed of the same one in any type of S.OR? thanks to all -- Concepción, Chile. ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: problem handling POSIX thread on FreeBSD
S.O , sorry -- Concepción, Chile. ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
