Re: too many open file descriptors messages since bind 9.4.2-P1 (port dns94)

2008-07-16 Thread Thomas Vogt
Hello Am 15.07.2008 um 22:59 schrieb JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉: At Tue, 15 Jul 2008 22:54:11 +0200, Thomas Vogt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Since i updated my FreeBSD 6.3 dns server with the latest bind version in the ports (dns/bind94) my system is flooding my log with "too many open file descri

Re: mpd5.1 MTU problem

2008-07-16 Thread Ian Smith
On Thu, 17 Jul 2008, Wasily Lin wrote: > Hello, > I set up a PPPoE server on FreeBSD 7.0(amd64) with mpd 5.1 and it works > fine for all clients except for my FreeBSD 7.0(i386) Notebook. > Connecting has no problem and I get ip but all website can not be access > even on PPPoE server itself

Re: named.conf: query-source address

2008-07-16 Thread Andrew Snow
Don't forget the souls who find themselves using jails. In this case it is common to want a name server on the parent host but not on any of the jail IPs. ___ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ne

Re: FreeBSD NAT-T patch integration [CFR/CFT]

2008-07-16 Thread Sam Leffler
Sam Leffler wrote: Larry Baird wrote: And how do I know that it works ? Well, when it doesn't work, I do know it, quite quickly most of the time ! I have to chime in here. I did most of the initial porting of the NAT-T patches from Kame IPSec to FAST_IPSEC. I did look at every line of co

Re: Enabling MSI-X on -CURRENT for New Network Driver

2008-07-16 Thread Sepherosa Ziehau
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 11:15 AM, Bruce Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, 16 Jul 2008, David Christensen wrote: > >> I'm working on adding MSI-X support for a new network driver >> and having some difficulty in actually getting an interrupt. >> Does this look right? > > I don't know, but o

Re: Enabling MSI-X on -CURRENT for New Network Driver

2008-07-16 Thread Bruce Evans
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008, David Christensen wrote: I'm working on adding MSI-X support for a new network driver and having some difficulty in actually getting an interrupt. Does this look right? I don't know, but on FreeBSD cluster machines running RELENG_8 bce generates too many interrupts -- appr

mpd5.1 MTU problem

2008-07-16 Thread Wasily Lin
Hello, I set up a PPPoE server on FreeBSD 7.0(amd64) with mpd 5.1 and it works fine for all clients except for my FreeBSD 7.0(i386) Notebook. Connecting has no problem and I get ip but all website can not be access even on PPPoE server itself(Apache installed), so can not ftp site. I've used

Re: "ping" with packets larger then 25152 bytes fails.

2008-07-16 Thread Peter Jeremy
On 2008-Jul-16 12:37:59 -0700, Barney Cordoba <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >When I run "ping" between 2 identical FreeBSD hosts, with packets larger >> >then 25152 bytes, "ping" fails. ... >Isn't this sort of like going to your auto dealer and complaining that you get >vibration at 240mph? I don

Re: "ping" with packets larger then 25152 bytes fails.

2008-07-16 Thread Barney Cordoba
--- On Wed, 7/16/08, Peter Jeremy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: Peter Jeremy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: "ping" with packets larger then 25152 bytes fails. > To: "Eitan Shefi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org > Date: Wednesday, July 16, 2008, 7:55 AM > On 2008-Jul-16

Enabling MSI-X on -CURRENT for New Network Driver

2008-07-16 Thread David Christensen
I'm working on adding MSI-X support for a new network driver and having some difficulty in actually getting an interrupt. Does this look right? /* Select and configure the IRQ. */ sc->bxe_msix_count = pci_msix_count(dev); rid = 1; /* Try allocating MSI-X interrupts

Re: "ping" with packets larger then 25152 bytes fails.

2008-07-16 Thread Mark Atkinson
Eitan Shefi wrote: > When I run "ping" between 2 identical FreeBSD hosts, with packets larger > then 25152 bytes, "ping" fails. > > Does someone has an idea what might cause this failure ?[ My first guess is you're probably hitting the fragment limit for maximum fragments per packet. Which is l

Re: igb doesn't compile in STABLE?

2008-07-16 Thread gnn
At Tue, 15 Jul 2008 10:35:57 -0700, Jack Vogel wrote: > > OK, will put on my todo list :) > Thanks. A kernel built that way (i.e. with igb and em) does actually work, which is good, but if you're going to split them up we should get this right before 7.1. Best, George _

Re: "ping" with packets larger then 25152 bytes fails.

2008-07-16 Thread Peter Jeremy
On 2008-Jul-16 10:41:57 +0300, Eitan Shefi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >When I run "ping" between 2 identical FreeBSD hosts, with packets larger >then 25152 bytes, "ping" fails. Intriguing. >Does someone has an idea what might cause this failure ? No, but a few more datapoints: - it only affects

"ping" with packets larger then 25152 bytes fails.

2008-07-16 Thread Eitan Shefi
When I run "ping" between 2 identical FreeBSD hosts, with packets larger then 25152 bytes, "ping" fails. Does someone has an idea what might cause this failure ? Thanks, Eitan ___ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman

Re: too many open file descriptors messages since bind 9.4.2-P1 (port dns94)

2008-07-16 Thread Bakul Shah
On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 16:37:00 PDT JINMEI Tatuya / =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCP0BMQEMjOkgbKEI=?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Perhaps You're probably confused poll(2) with /dev/poll. The latter > behaves as you described (but is not portable as poll(2)). Indeed I am confused. Not sure where I got th