Re: [TEST/REVIEW] ng_ipfw: node to glue together ipfw(4) and netgraph(4)

On Tue, Jan 18, 2005 at 02:27:47PM -0800, Julian Elischer wrote: J firstly.. I was thinking that there are several good ways to mesh the J ipfw/divert/netgraph J stuff. J J Firstly there is the possibility of making the ipfw stuff a netgraph J node itself.. Yes, but this is a separate node.

Re: Is ther a tool to show online throughput of a socket

Guohan Lu wrote: Hi, netstat only shows the traffic per interface, I need traffic information per socket. Is there a tool to do this? not directly.. though trafshow may get you that information under some situations. (ports/net/trafshow) Best regards, Guohan

Re: [TEST/REVIEW] ng_ipfw: node to glue together ipfw(4) and netgraph(4)

Gleb Smirnoff wrote: On Tue, Jan 18, 2005 at 02:27:47PM -0800, Julian Elischer wrote: J firstly.. I was thinking that there are several good ways to mesh the J ipfw/divert/netgraph J stuff. J J Firstly there is the possibility of making the ipfw stuff a netgraph J node itself.. Yes, but this

Re: [TEST/REVIEW] ng_ipfw: node to glue together ipfw(4) andnetgraph(4)

On Wed, Jan 19, 2005 at 11:16:01AM +0100, Andre Oppermann wrote: A On Wed, Jan 19, 2005 at 01:32:35AM -0800, Julian Elischer wrote: A J If each active divert socket number had a pointer to the module to which it A J was attached then you could divert to either in-kernel netgraph targets or A

Re: docs/76399: [PATCH] sendto(2) is missing possible error EISCONN

Hello to freebsd-net, please, do you have some net-points to our discussion? It groved from docs-only problem ( http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=76399 ) to net-related questions too. Thanks. Giorgos Keramidas wrote (2005/01/19): On 2005-01-19 14:20, Rudolf Cejka [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [TEST/REVIEW] ng_ipfw: node to glue together ipfw(4) andnetgraph(4)

On Wed, Jan 19, 2005 at 03:34:26PM +0300, Gleb Smirnoff wrote: On Wed, Jan 19, 2005 at 11:16:01AM +0100, Andre Oppermann wrote: A On Wed, Jan 19, 2005 at 01:32:35AM -0800, Julian Elischer wrote: A J If each active divert socket number had a pointer to the module to which it A J was

Re: [TEST/REVIEW] ng_ipfw: node to glue together ipfw(4) andnetgraph(4)

On Wed, Jan 19, 2005 at 08:57:51AM -0800, Brooks Davis wrote: B Off the top of my head, I don't like the idea. What are the savings in B doing so? Is there a guarantee that you won't need more then one at B once? Well, I've spent enough braincycles arguing with myself, so I ask you to decide to

need help

Hi,.. I just formatted freeBSD4.9. i want it run as a router and a firewall. does anybody out here can help me out.. and commands do i want.. from complete to become a sevver.. thanks.. - Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's

Re: [TEST/REVIEW] ng_ipfw: node to glue together ipfw(4) andnetgraph(4)

Gleb Smirnoff wrote: On Wed, Jan 19, 2005 at 11:16:01AM +0100, Andre Oppermann wrote: A On Wed, Jan 19, 2005 at 01:32:35AM -0800, Julian Elischer wrote: A J If each active divert socket number had a pointer to the module to which it A J was attached then you could divert to either in-kernel

vlans changed?

Did something change from 5.2.1 to 5.3? In 5.2.1 I used to have a config where the parent device, em(4), didn't have an IP, and the vlan dev had the IP address. (yes, the parent device was UP) I then configured the trunk (on the switch) to have a native vlan of something other than the vlan

Re: vlans changed?

On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 13:01:52 -0800, Charlie Schluting [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Now, in 5.3, the only thing I can get working is to configure the em0 int with the IP, and set the trunk to have the native vlan corresponding to that IP. Weird. Sounds like you're not getting the module loaded.

Re: vlans changed?

I had major grief with the em driver and vlans, i have found by tcpdumping on the em0 interface actually causes more problems. there are some more posts about this a couple of months ago, my resolution was to swap the em card for an fxp instead as the box was in production and i didnt have other

Re: vlans changed?

Jon Simola wrote: On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 13:01:52 -0800, Charlie Schluting [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Now, in 5.3, the only thing I can get working is to configure the em0 int with the IP, and set the trunk to have the native vlan corresponding to that IP. Weird. Sounds like you're not getting the

Re: vlans changed?

Mike Wolman wrote: I had major grief with the em driver and vlans, i have found by tcpdumping on the em0 interface actually causes more problems. there are some more posts about this a couple of months ago, my resolution was to swap the em card for an fxp instead as the box was in production and i

[PATCH] 802.1p priority

Hello! I want to implement 802.1p priority tagging for VLAN. I made this dirty patch and wonder - it works for me. May somebody look at it and tell me is this enough for BSD community or should I look and patch something more? -- With respect, Boris ---