.
Bart Van Kerckhove wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Paul / Ingo,
I tried all of this :/ still, 256/512 descriptors seem to work the
best. Happy to let you log into the machine and fiddle around if you
want :)
I've been watching this thread closely, since I'm
i'd love
to try it :)
Something with a really big L1 cache :P
Paul wrote:
ULE + PREEMPTION for non SMP
no major differences with SMP with ULE/4BSD and preemption ON/OFF
32 bit UP test coming up with new cpu
and I'm installing dragonfly sometime this weekend :]
UP: 1mpps in one direction
I tried all of this :/ still, 256/512 descriptors seem to work the best.
Happy to let you log into the machine and fiddle around if you want :)
Paul
Ingo Flaschberger wrote:
Dear Paul,
what could cause this?
*) kern.polling.idle_poll enabled?
*) kern.polling.user_frac
back to the 64 bit and try 1000
256/256 ?? I don't think I tried that one..
Guess another reinstall :
Installing 64 bit.. (again) Just to be sure..
Paul
Ingo Flaschberger wrote:
Dear Paul,
SMP DISABLED on my Opteron 2212 (ULE, Preemption on)
Yields ~750kpps in em0 and out em1 (one
Bruce Evans wrote:
On Wed, 2 Jul 2008, Paul wrote:
...
---Reboot with 4096/4096(my guess is that it will be
a lot worse, more errors..)
Without polling, 4096 is horrible, about 200kpps less ... :/
Turning on polling..
polling on, 4096 is bad,
input
Bruce Evans wrote:
On Thu, 3 Jul 2008, Paul wrote:
Bruce Evans wrote:
No polling:
843762 25337 52313248 1 0178 0
763555 0 47340414 1 0178 0
830189 0 51471722 1 0178 0
838724 0 52000892
Flaschberger wrote:
Dear Paul,
Tomorrow comes opteron so it's 1ghz faster than this one, and I
can see if it scales directly with cpu speed or what happens.
can you send me a lspci -v?
I did another SMP test with an interesting results. I took one of the
cpus out of the machine, so it was just left
to drop in a 3ghz opteron instead of the 2ghz 2212 that's in
here and see how that scales, using UP same kernel etc I have now.
Julian Elischer wrote:
Paul wrote:
ULE without PREEMPTION is now yeilding better results.
input (em0) output
packets errs bytes
lol
Oh well.. Tomorrow hopefully test and 32 bit test.. then i'm done
for while.. :P
Paul
Ingo Flaschberger wrote:
Dear Paul,
SMP DISABLED on my Opteron 2212 (ULE, Preemption on)
Yields ~750kpps in em0 and out em1 (one direction)
I am miffed why this yields more pps than
Thanks.. I was hoping I wasn't seeing things :
I do not like inconsistencies.. :/
Stefan Lambrev wrote:
Greetings Paul,
--OK I'm stumped now.. Rebuilt with preemption and ULE and
preemption again and it's not doing what it did before..
I saw this in my configuration too :) Just leave
I am going to.. I have an opteron 270 dual set up on 32 bit and the 2212
is set up on 64 bit :)
Today should bring some 32 bit results as well as etherchannel results.
Ingo Flaschberger wrote:
Dear Paul,
Dual Opteron 2212, Recompiled kernel with 7-STABLE and removed a lot
of junk
I can't reproduce the 580kpps maximum that I saw when I first compiled
for some reason, I don't understand, the max I get even with ULE and
preemption
is now about 530 and it dips to 480 a lot.. The first time I tried it it
was at 580 and dipped to 520...what the?.. (kernel config attached at
is compiling now.. won't do 400kpps with GENERIC
kernel, as with 64 bit did 450k with GENERIC, although that could be
the difference between opteron 270 and opteron 2212..
Paul
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo
What options do you have enabled on the linux server?
sysctl -a | grep net.ipv4.tcp
and on the bsd
sysctl -a net.inet.tcp
It sounds like a problem with BSD not handing the dropped data or ack
packets so what happens is it pushes a burst of
data out 100mbit and the switch drops the packets and
a lot higher or it bombs with 'too
many neighbors'... I don't see a setting like this in BSD sysctl .
Thanks!
Paul
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL
rx queues because it has a separate process for each
interface
and the result is WAY more CPU usage and a little over half the pps
throughput with a single port ..
If anyone is interested in tackling some these issues please e-mail me.
It would be greatly appreciated.
Paul
Julian Elischer
was a programmer sometimes, but network
engineering will have to do. :D
Julian Elischer wrote:
Paul wrote:
Is PF better than ipfw? iptables almost has no impact on routing
performance unless I add a swath of rules to it and then it bombs
I need maybe 10 rules max and I don't want 20
to no buffer and rx overruns (dev.em.0.stats=1)
Mike Tancsa wrote:
At 04:04 AM 6/29/2008, Paul wrote:
This is just a question but who can get more than 400k pps forwarding
performance ?
OK, I setup 2 boxes on either end of a RELENG_7 box from about May 7th
just now, to see with 2 boxes blasting
tested both.
There are no RTM_MISS message in 7-RELEASE so someone changed something
to -STABLE :/
Paul
Steve Bertrand wrote:
Mike Tancsa wrote:
At 04:04 AM 6/29/2008, Paul wrote:
This is just a question but who can get more than 400k pps
forwarding performance ?
OK, I setup 2 boxes
Well it's supposed to, but it doesn't seem to do it as well as it should :
How about copying header direct DMA from NIC into cache, then copy from
cache into output NIC after applying whatever filters/changes/etc?
Ingo Flaschberger wrote:
Dear Alex,
OK, I setup 2 boxes on either end of a
to be limited by the
routing path in the kernel more than anything else.
If a driver/hardware didn't support interrupt mitigation then it would
definitely lock the machine.
Sepherosa Ziehau wrote:
On 7/1/08, Paul [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
All the NIC drivers in 7 pretty much use interrupt
24360300465 0 25234 0
387329 19426 24014402440 0 23938 0
Ingo Flaschberger wrote:
Dear Paul,
tried interface polling?
what hardware system? how are the nic's connected?
Kind regards,
ingo flaschberger
geschaeftsleitung
this, but I don't think it does it on 7.0-RELEASE,
only 7.0-STABLE and CURRENT.
I will try and confirm though.
Paul
Mike Tancsa wrote:
At 04:04 AM 6/29/2008, Paul wrote:
This is just a question but who can get more than 400k pps forwarding
performance ?
I have tested fbsd 6/7/8 so far with many
this also.
There's a lot of differences in the /net dir from release to stable but
most are in bridging/gif/lagg etc.
Route.c the only difference is
-RELEASE
+STABLE
- rtfree(rt);
+ RTFREE_LOCKED(rt);
Must be generating it from somewhere else?
Paul wrote
and now I have a 3ghz xeon
and 2.2ghz opteron brand new hardware and can barely get more than
that.. Doesn't make sense to me.
Ingo Flaschberger wrote:
Dear Paul,
does the em-task jump from cpu to cpu?
(mp-systems are not really better for forwarding performance).
try once with only 1 cpu
Well who wants to code it ? I would gladly pay someone to make it work
the way I want. :) It needs to be able to do line rate gig-e with 64
byte packets and 250k routes.
FBSD6 is definitely slower.
Haven't tried dragonfly.
Thanks
Ingo Flaschberger wrote:
Dear Paul,
Yes it does
Tancsa wrote:
At 08:16 PM 6/29/2008, Ingo Flaschberger wrote:
Dear Paul,
Yes it does but it seems to use a lot more of one cpu than the
others so It's really not SMP.. Can I stop it from doing this with
some setting?
Why can't there be 4 taskq's?
it is possible, but it need to be coded.
hz
less cpu, although I haven't generated the same pps with that yet.. I am
going to test it soon
Ingo Flaschberger wrote:
Dear Paul,
I tried this.. I put 6-STABLE (6.3), using default driver was slower
than FBSD7
have you set the rx/tx buffers?
/boot/loader.conf
hw.em.rxd=4096
hw.em.txd=4096
I have the same 'problem' if that helps any.. Sockets stuck for over a
month in CLOSED and they have a * for the port on the source IP.
tcp4 0 0 67.1.1.1.* 67.1.1.2.1261 CLOSED
7.0-RELEASE-p1 FreeBSD 7.0-RELEASE-p1 #6: Thu Apr 17 18:11:49 EDT 2008
amd64
Doesn't seem
Hi Eygene.. It happens with telnet :) A lot of my closed entries are
from telnet so I can't really put a finger on any specific application :/
Eygene Ryabinkin wrote:
Paul, good day.
Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 08:45:50AM -0400, Paul wrote:
I have the same 'problem' if that helps any.. Sockets
something to do with it.. :P
Thanks :)
Paul
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At Thu, 26 Jun 2008 23:25:18 -0400,
Paul wrote:
I have a FreeBSD router set up with Full BGP routes and I'm doing some
tests on using it for routing.
7.0-RELEASE-p1 FreeBSD 7.0-RELEASE-p1 #6: Thu Apr 17 18:11:49 EDT 2008
.
It even does this with just a handful of routes in the routing table , I
tried that too just to rule that out.
I don't remember Freebsd 4/5 doing this??
Thank you.
Paul
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo
it is trying to find a route for?
Thanks
Paul
Bruce M. Simpson wrote:
Paul wrote:
Get these with GRE tunnel on
FreeBSD 7.0-STABLE FreeBSD 7.0-STABLE #5: Sun May 11 19:00:57 EDT
2008 :/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/ROUTER amd64
But do not get them with 7.0-RELEASE
Any ideas what changed
of the message.. probably be good in the
future, but something is wrong because I've added a default and removed
it also so maybe something with the -STABLE code that changed something
in the routing area..
Bruce M. Simpson wrote:
Paul wrote:
Get these with GRE tunnel on
FreeBSD 7.0-STABLE
, this is a more obscure
bug that occurs on some hardware, and it seems to require that you have
a management BMC, this is what Paul Saab is seeing, there is not a final
fix for this issue yet.
Note that both these problems only occur with the esb2lan type NIC.
Jack
On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 5:51
Hoping maybe one of you can test this as I didn't have time to look into
it, but I tried twice.
Setting up gre interface and then using IPFW
Gre interface 1.1.1.1 -- 1.1.1.2
ipfw fwd 1.1.1.2 ip from any to any recv lagg2
Command works no problem. The instant any traffic at all is sent
Grr.. forgot..
7.0-STABLE FreeBSD 7.0-STABLE #5: Sun May 11 19:00:57 EDT 2008 amd64
Paul wrote:
Hoping maybe one of you can test this as I didn't have time to look
into it, but I tried twice.
Setting up gre interface and then using IPFW
Gre interface 1.1.1.1 -- 1.1.1.2
ipfw fwd 1.1.1.2 ip
Probably still in the routing table and didn't get removed when the
interface was destroyed..
do a route get 10.5.43.225
Support (Rudy) wrote:
I created and destoryed, brought up and down a vlan... now it is not
accepting an IP what does the 'File exists' mean?
#ifconfig vlan9
vlan9:
This would be awesome, like the Yandex driver for fbsd 6..
I wish there was some way of doing this for 7.0 :) maybe this is it..
So this is the question now...
Markus Oestreicher wrote:
Good Day,
I see that the new igb driver has a tunable for multiple rx/tx queues.
Is that for future
This is very strange.. I can do:
netstat -w 10 -I lagg0
input(lagg0) output
packets errs bytespackets errs bytes colls
57806 0 41751685 232442 0 51062425 0
56459 0 38341591 225146 0 48865209 0
on single interface you should use -I
I do not know if this is bug, but netstat -w 100
something_non_existing works on my bsd and just shows Total
So may be from here comes the confusion. You think, that netstat count
only traffic on lagg0,
but it shows you the Total traffic?
Paul wrote
Is there a list of patches that have been applied to -STABLE since
the -RELEASE ?
I can't seem to find a simple organized list of applied patches
(something similar to linux kernel changelog).
I want to know if anything has been fixed or udpated in the network area
to see if it warrants
All,
As a follow up to myself I installed an Intel PCIe NIC and disabled the on
board RTL based one and all my problems went away. Been running with 4GB
installed for a couple days now with absolutely no network issues. So seems
like there's some problem with RTL NICs and = 4GB of RAM.
--
Paul
I've been waiting for something like this. Linux has done policy
routing for many many years and is very good at it. I prefer to use
FreeBSD for routing though and this is a feature I have been waiting for :)
Mainly to use with BGP , having multiple BGP routing tables. I would
like it to be
successfully run
both sets of DIMMs by themselves, so at least it seems that this isn't a
hardware problem.
I'd appreciate any suggestions on tracking down the problem, again the logs
don't seem to have any useful info on it.
--
Paul Haddad ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED])
Copyright (c) 1992-2008
I had some similar issues for some reason.. Check the output of netstat -m
and see if the mbuf clusters in use line if the total is anywhere near
the max. Mine was maxing out and causing some very weird problems with
no errors in any log anywhere.
Paul Haddad wrote:
Hi All,
I've got
The following reply was made to PR amd64/122780; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: Paul [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc:
Subject: Re: amd64/122780: [lagg] tcpdump on lagg interface during high pps
wedges netcode
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2008 18:40:53 -0400
It seems
some incrementing slowly and would like some help
tuning the polling values to rid myself of new increments of the
lost/suspsect/stalled. But first this tcpdump problem should be
addressed.
Thank you!!
Paul
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
network
restart in Linux seems to do this.
I have tried network_ipv6, netif, ifconfig and a few odd and ends from
Google, but no joy so far.
This is just for testing, rebooting between test cases is getting a bit
tedious. freeBSD is 6.2.
/etc/rc.d/netif restart
--
Paul Schmehl ([EMAIL
be:
#define IEEE80211_MS_TO_TU(x) (((x) * 1024) / 1000)
This yields IEEE80211_MS_TO_TU(1000) = (1000 * 1024) / 1000 = 1024
The other macro needs a similar change.
Am I missing something, interpreting something incorrectly? Please let
me know.
Paul
sense other than
everybody is doing it.
--
Paul Schmehl ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Senior Information Security Analyst
The University of Texas at Dallas
http://www.utdallas.edu/ir/security/
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org
driver as well.
-Bill
--
=
-Bill Paul(510) 749-2329 | Senior Engineer, Master of Unix-Fu
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | Wind River Systems
From Julian Elischer [EMAIL PROTECTED], Fri, Jul 20, 2007 at 11:36:50AM
-0700:
Robert Watson wrote:
On Tue, 17 Jul 2007, Max Laier wrote:
So far I have had 0 (zero) reports of problems since this thread began.
Could people using uid/gid/jail rules with ipfw or pf on 7.x *please*
try
better off upgrading the entire system to 6.2? (I prefer not to do
this, because I have to take the site down to do so. Patching files and
rebuilding world and kernel only takes the box out of service during the
reboots.
--
Paul Schmehl ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Senior Information Security Analyst
--On Wednesday, July 11, 2007 12:30:21 -0500 Josh Paetzel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Wednesday 11 July 2007, Tom Judge wrote:
Paul Schmehl wrote:
I'm running 6.1 RELEASE (i386) and I've been replacing the
if_bce.c file with a slightly newer one that at least got the
driver working without
comment?
Paul Schmehl ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Senior Information Security Analyst
The University of Texas at Dallas
http://www.utdallas.edu/ir/security/
(B1), v0.9.6 mem
0xf800-0xf9ff irq 16 at device 0.0 on pci5
bce1: ASIC ID 0x57081010; Revision (B1); PCI-X 64-bit 133MHz
miibus1: MII bus on bce1
bce1: Ethernet address: 00:13:72:fb:2a:ab
--
Paul Schmehl ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Senior Information Security Analyst
The University of Texas
On 6/6/07, Pyun YongHyeon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm unsure what caused this issue but it seems that lge(4) lacks some
protections from overly-fragmented packets.
Did you see watchdog timeout messages in console?
never on this machine
I don't have lge(4) hardwares so it's hard to fix it.
)
# another samba server to bcast
17:05:29.708120 10.0.0.127.33191 10.0.3.255.netbios-ns: [udp sum ok]
NBT UDP PACKET(137): QUERY; REQUEST; BROADCAST (DF) (ttl 64, id 0, len
78)
Thanks in advance
Paul
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http
133MHz
Paul Schmehl ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Senior Information Security Analyst
The University of Texas at Dallas
http://www.utdallas.edu/ir/security/
. You can add your own protocol types, but
you'll need to read the supplied manual entries first :)
Paul.
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL
Hello Bill,
* Bill Paul [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- Switching from and to promiscuous mode takes 7 seconds. All packets
are dropped in the mean time.
The SIOCSIFFLAGS handler in re_ioctl() currently just takes a shortcut
of calling re_init(). While this does eventually end up
On Tue, Nov 28, 2006 at 08:46:00PM +0100, Ed Schouten wrote:
Hello,
I'm running FreeBSD 6.2-PRERELEASE on my new desktop. It has the
following hardware:
- Intel Core 2 Duo 6400
- Asus P5B motherboard
- On-board Realtek NIC (8168B/8111B)
For some reason,
* Bill Paul [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's more likely a problem with the multicast filter programming.
IPv6 is all about the multicasting (neighbord discovery depends on it
to work correctly). I can't explain why it's not working though.
I've tested the sample 8168B/8111B cards
On Tue, Nov 28, 2006 at 08:46:00PM +0100, Ed Schouten wrote:
Hello,
I'm running FreeBSD 6.2-PRERELEASE on my new desktop. It has the
following hardware:
- Intel Core 2 Duo 6400
- Asus P5B motherboard
- On-board Realtek NIC (8168B/8111B)
For some reason, it drops
/~scrosby/hash
Paul Twohey
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--On Tuesday, October 10, 2006 22:30:29 -0700 Doug Barton
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 10 Oct 2006, Paul Schmehl wrote:
Why isn't anyone working on updating it?
This is a volunteer project. No one has volunteered.
I'd volunteer if I had a clue. I'm not a programmer, and my only
a copy you can try if you like.
Can you post a url?
Why isn't anyone working on updating it?
Paul Schmehl ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Adjunct Information Security Officer
The University of Texas at Dallas
http://www.utdallas.edu/ir/security/
/ipw start
Starting ipw [ipw0:bss]ipwcontrol: Can't load /boot/firmware/ipw.fw to
driver: Device not configured
Have I missed something?
Paul Schmehl ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Adjunct Information Security Officer
The University of Texas at Dallas
http://www.utdallas.edu/ir/security/
--On October 10, 2006 4:33:35 AM +0200 Max Laier [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Tuesday 10 October 2006 04:12, Paul Schmehl wrote:
I've been trying to get this to work on my laptop without success.
According to this page -
http://damien.bergamini.free.fr/ipw/ipw-freebsd.html - the ipw driver
driver version is that? I had to update the if_bce.c file from
version 0.9.5 to 0.9.6 to correct a problem with the NIC ceasing to pass
traffic and requiring a reboot to restore connectivity. (I'm running 6.1
RELEASE.)
Is this a newer version?
Paul Schmehl ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Adjunct
this:
//
/* BCE Driver Version
*/
//
char bce_driver_version[] = v0.9.6;
Is that the version you installed?
Paul Schmehl ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Adjunct Information Security Officer
I'm trying to install 6.0 RELEASE on a new laptop, and the NIC wasn't
recognized. It's a Broadcomm NetExtreme 57xx Gigabit NIC. Apparently
the bge driver doesn't work for that? Is there a driver available?
--
Paul Schmehl ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Adjunct Information Security Officer
Brad wrote:
Source exists for newer Broadcom Gig chips (575x and derivatives) yet
there is no documentation available for that either.
Documentation does exist, just not publically.
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
get access to each and every packet
on a given interface.
Any suggestions? Is there some pcap option that I need to look at?
--
Paul Haddad ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED])
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman
--On Thursday, March 23, 2006 11:55:34 -0800 Brooks Davis
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Mar 23, 2006 at 10:07:36AM -0600, Paul Schmehl wrote:
In 6.0 SECURITY, what starts up lo0? It's not starting by default, and
/etc/rc.d/netif has no effect on the interface. I *believe
merited investigation
(until now.)
Since I did the installs on both boxes, I've obviously missed something
during the install (or chosen the wrong option). Does anyone have a clue
what it might be? Or how I might fix this problem so the boxes will bring
up lo0 at boot?
Paul Schmehl ([EMAIL
--On March 22, 2006 7:43:31 PM -0600 Paul Schmehl [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I have two machines (that I know of) that have the same problem. The
loopback interface has no ipv4 address, and it doesn't start up on boot.
If I bring the interface up (ifconfig lo0 up),. it has no ipv4 address.
If I
The following reply was made to PR kern/93220; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: Paul Blazejowski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Tilman Linneweh [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: misc/93220: nd6_lookup: failed to add route for a neighbor
Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2006 15:35
On 12/31/05, Bill Vermillion [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I know you'll find this hard to believe, but on Sat, Dec 31, 2005
at 02:52 , Paul actually admitted to saying:
I've just installed FreeBSD 6.0 Release yesterday, I've spend the last
two days trying to resolve a networking problem
can give me. I've
included some information below which may help diagnose the problem.
Thanks,
Paul
// uname -a
FreeBSD darkstar.home 6.0-RELEASE FreeBSD 6.0-RELEASE #0: Thu Nov 3
09:36:13 UTC 2005
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC i386
// ifconfig
rl0: flags=8843UP
--
=
-Bill Paul(510) 749-2329 | Senior Engineer, Master of Unix-Fu
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | Wind River Systems
=
adamw you're just BEGGING to face the moose
Simon L. Nielsen wrote:
On 2005.10.31 13:29:44 -0800, Doug Barton wrote:
As I mentioned in my previous post, I have been using earthlink's IPv6
experiment to get an IPv6 connection at home. I am therefore trying to use
it as much as possible to see what works, and what breaks. FreeBSD makes
YOu can try ng_fec which is Etherchannel, not sure if it works in FreeBSD
5.x properly, it did in 4.x
Cheers
Paul
On Fri, 26 Aug 2005, Dave+Seddon wrote:
Greetings,
- Gig cards are cheap.
- PCI bus throughput is really bad (like 32MB/s)
- There is no easy way to bond on FreeBSD, but you
Paul
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Paul Khavkine
Networks/Systems Planning
On Mon, 22 Aug 2005, Julian Elischer wrote:
Paul Khavkine wrote:
Julian.
You should probably look at the ng_etf node too BTW.
How does ng_etf deal with that ?
no, but as an example of something that is designed to be attached directly
to the ng_ether nodes.
in ng_etf, do you check
Hi guys.
I'm writing a small program to read raw ethernet frames out of netgraph
to capture Spannign Tree packets from the switch.
Is it possible to pick up STP frames without putting the interface in
promiscuous mode ?
Thanx
Paul
Paul
On Fri, 19 Aug 2005, Julian Elischer wrote:
Paul Khavkine wrote:
Hi guys.
I'm writing a small program to read raw ethernet frames out of netgraph
to capture Spannign Tree packets from the switch.
Is it possible to pick up STP frames without putting the interface in
promiscuous mode
Could anyone please tell me how to get dsl setup done on freebsd, I woudl
really appreciate the help
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
We've gotten to the point that we'd like to also extend SACK support to
RELENG_4. When reporting any issues, please include a tcpdump or any
relevant information to help in debugging any issues (core files etc).
http://yogurt.org/FreeBSD/sack4.diff
. I have a pair of NICs and multiprocessor machines to
test this on. Please send me an email if you've got a concern about
this or have already started work...
Thanks,
--Paul Willmann
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org
compression (lzo,
zlib and even a traffic shaper.
regards,
M.
HTH
Paul Schenkeveld, Consultant
PSconsult ICT Services BV
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL
Jon Noack wrote:
Eli Dart wrote:
Careful there.one major reason I use FreeBSD is that, compared
with the other operating systems I can use, major breakages are rare.
I expect the policy that prevents you from deploying the most
featureful OS available is there to avoid the late-night pain
Marko Zec wrote:
I've prepared a more or less blind backport of the TCP SACK code which was
recently introduced in -CURRENT. Didn't put the patch through lots of
testing, but it just seems to work... The patch is available from the URL
bellow and should apply cleanly against both 4.10-RELEASE
, then
dhcp again.
Thanks!
-Charlie
$0.02
Regards,
Paul Schenkeveld, Consultant
PSconsult ICT Services BV
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
.
Is this possible with FreeBSD? Do you have any suggestions on the best
way to proceed?
Thank you,
-Paul Querna
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
protocols this is (I think) the easiest
solution, with UDP is is probably a bit easier than the netgraph
approach.
Jim
Regards,
Paul Schenkeveld, Consultant
PSconsult ICT Services BV
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman
--
=
-Bill Paul(510) 749-2329 | Senior Engineer, Master of Unix-Fu
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | Wind River Systems
=
adamw you're
Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
Dear networkers,
I'm looking for a Broadcom BCM5704[S] technical datasheet. If anyone has
such a beast, or knows how one could obtain it, please let me know.
As john pointed out, you can only get this under NDA from broadcom.
What exactly are you trying to solve? I
static routes up from 2).
Greetings,
Paul Schenkeveld, Consultant
PSconsult ICT Services BV
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
201 - 300 of 358 matches
Mail list logo
