On Sun, 23 Jun 2002 22:54:32 -0700 (PDT), in sentex.lists.freebsd.net you
wrote:
On Sun, 23 Jun 2002, Mike Tancsa wrote:
On Sun, 23 Jun 2002 18:53:32 -0700 (PDT), in sentex.lists.freebsd.net you
wrote:
After spending a couple of hours getting it to compile, I
got Roaring Penguin (latest
stop testing and often thay make assumptions about the
parts of the spec that they shouldn't
Quite possibly. The hard part to explain to the manufacture is that it
works with
Windows 95,98, XP, 2000, Linux and a Cisco 827.
It does not work with
FreeBSD
---Mike
Mike Tancsa ([EMAIL
? Will the page be shared? That could
be a big reduction in mbuf cluster usage on some http/ftp systems, I'd
guess.
Mike Silby Silbersack
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-net in the body of the message
,
you'll probably have to wander around tcp_output.c a bit. When doing so,
also take into consideration new reno (rfc 2582, I think.)
If you find something that you believe is a definite problem, please post
back to this list. I'd love to help, but I'm busy with other matters at
the moment.
Mike
PROTECTED]
set authkey thepassword
set ifaddr 10.0.0.1/0 10.0.0.2/0 255.255.255.0 0.0.0.0
add default HISADDR
---Mike
Mike Tancsa, tel +1 519 651 3400
Sentex Communications
Hi,
the mss fixup is enabled by default and is part of the stock PPP from what
I understand. Also, this was all working just great when the other end was
a redback. The problems only started when the telco moved the termination
to the ERX.
---Mike
At 04:34 PM 18/06/2002 -0500
-endpoint and then connect again with the client...
ifconfig tun0 on the client side does indeed show the MTU specified in the
virt-template.
---Mike
At 03:09 PM 6/18/2002 -0700, Tom Samplonius wrote:
Well, if you need to find the MTU, the ppp logs should tell you what the
remote end
Yes, that did it! Thanks very much! What is different about that, and me
setting it on the other end as part of the virt-template ?
---Mike
At 12:33 AM 6/19/2002 +0100, Brian Somers wrote:
Perhaps adding
set mtu max 1452
will help ?
On Tue, 18 Jun 2002 16:54:49 -0400, Mike
why this is necessary on the ERX and not on the SMSes.
---Mike
Mike Tancsa, tel +1 519 651 3400
Sentex Communications,[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Providing Internet
Actually, in your documentation you mention that its broken for the
situation where the FreeBSD box acts as a gateway. In my case, its broken
right from the FreeBSD box. But the same machine connected with Windows 98
does not have the problem.
---Mike
At 04:18 PM 6/18/2002 -0700
and the speed is a few hundred bytes /s
But, when I do the same from my connection at home, I see the same sorts of
flags and speeds are as expected
---Mike
At 04:18 PM 6/18/2002 -0700, Renaud Waldura wrote:
Section 6.3 of the following document describes this issue in detail and may
that be acceptable?
/me has this bad feeling that he just roped himself into auditing the PTMU
code.
Mike Silby Silbersack
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-net in the body of the message
On Tue, 11 Jun 2002, Phil Dibowitz wrote:
Glad it's fixed, and thanks for the info.
Phil
Well, it's not fixed yet, but it will be. (Probably a week at least, I
don't have the time to devote to it right now, despite it being a simple
change.)
Mike Silby Silbersack
To Unsubscribe: send
that it gets handled properly. If you
find less serious bugs, feel free to drop me an e-mail if mail to the -net
list falls on deaf ears.
Mike Silby Silbersack
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-net in the body of the message
On Tue, 4 Jun 2002, jayanth wrote:
Can you dump the output of netstat -s -p tcp ?
Checking for listen queue overflows and syncache bucket overflows.
jayanth
And netstat -La too, please. I'm interested in if you're accepting
sockets fast enough.
Mike Silby Silbersack
To Unsubscribe
kern.ipc.maxsockets?
Mike Silby Silbersack
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-net in the body of the message
.
3. Could you use tcpdump to determine what exactly is going wrong and
post a url to the log so that we can investigate what is going wrong?
Thanks,
Mike Silby Silbersack
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-net in the body of the message
free view of the Internet this
gives us a whopping 5.5 Mbytes in kernel memory savings (110k routes).
--
Andre
Hrm. Once you've cut the route metrics out of the route entries, is there
anything preventing you from doing away with cloned routes alltogether? :)
Mike Silby Silbersack
the field to rt_unused with a comment indicating that it
should be axed if anyone else has a good reason to change the structure.
I'll look over your latest round of patches tomorrow. They're a bit more
in depth, I can't evaluate them in 5 minutes. :)
Mike Silby Silbersack
To Unsubscribe: send mail
at in the next day or two.
Mike Silby Silbersack
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-net in the body of the message
misconfiguration?
When I stop zebra, delete gif6 interface and start zebra again, OSPF packets
start appears on gif5 interface, and so on...
I could provide more useful information, if required.
What is wrong with my zebra configuration?
Thanks in advance for any help...
Regards,
Mike
buildworld first so
you really do update to 4.6 and try again.
---Mike
Mike Tancsa ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Sentex Communications Corp,
Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
Given enough time, 100 monkeys on 100 routers
could setup a national IP network. (KDW2)
To Unsubscribe
need
to play with numbers in .secrets file.
Any feedback/corrections would be appreciated!
-Mike
** `client' mpd.conf **
default:
load vpn
vpn:
new -i ng1 vpn vpn
set iface disable on-demand
# set iface addrs 192.168.1.1 192.168.2.1
set iface idle 0
MTRG in conjunction with snmpd. It will gather the data you require. Also,
you can safely run SNMPD as a non root user for this purpose and I strongly
advise that. Both programs are in the ports tree.
---Mike
On Tue, 21 May 2002 14:58:22 +0300, in sentex.lists.freebsd.net you wrote
it useful.
I've been pondering various methods to handle out of mbuf cluster
situations better, but handling your case seems especially difficult.
I'll have to think more.
Mike Silby Silbersack
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-net in the body of the message
.
Personally, I hope we keep ECN support out of the tree; it's unlikely to
provide any benefit over the internet in general, and will just make
integrating other TCP changes more difficult.
I haven't looked over the ALTQ patches, but integration of those changes
sounds like a good idea.
Mike Silby
list who wants to make a name for his/her self. :)
Mike Silby Silbersack
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-net in the body of the message
On Mon, 6 May 2002, Garrett Wollman wrote:
On Mon, 6 May 2002 17:26:20 -0500 (CDT), Mike Silbersack [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Is doing this wise? I have this nagging feeling that randomizing (or
zeroing on each new connection) the timestamp would degrade its usefulness
for PAWS checks
like filesystem for sockets would be better. :)
Mike Silby Silbersack
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-net in the body of the message
on whether or not syn cookies are enabled.) With the
pre-syncache code, yes, a RST was sent at that time.
Mike Silby Silbersack
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-net in the body of the message
be defeated with your proposed changes?
I'm not opposed to your idea, I'd just like to fully understand the
implications before any changes are made.
Mike Silby Silbersack
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-net in the body of the message
for it to be
retransmitted is the better idea. After that is done, adding a sysctl
which enables the RST functionality wouldn't be a problem if you think
that it may be beneficial for those using load balancers.
Mike Silby Silbersack
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd
to RELENG_4_5.
Mike Silby Silbersack
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-net in the body of the message
up, and RSTs will be sent to
incoming connections. This should be true under 4.4 or 4.5.
The listen manpage looks to be pretty accurate in its description.
Mike Silby Silbersack
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-net in the body of the message
in the source are
up to date.
Mike Silby Silbersack
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-net in the body of the message
, the reality of 32 bit sequence
numbers being relatively small and timestamps being needed to track
wraparound is setting in. Although we don't use the various rfc 1323
options to their full extent yet, keeping them enabled is a good idea in
the long run.
Mike Silby Silbersack
To Unsubscribe
, Archie's answer for unnumbered interfaces isn't in the route
manpage. I'm glad I asked.
MikeC
-Original Message-
From: Julian Elischer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, March 25, 2002 9:49 PM
To: Cambria, Mike
Cc: 'Archie Cobbs'; '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject
: Friday, March 22, 2002 1:19 AM
To: Julian Elischer
Cc: Cambria, Mike; '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject:Re: Unnumbered IP Interface
Julian Elischer writes:
A while ago it was possible to use 'route' to add a rout eto a p2p
interface by name and not assign it any addresses.
Yes
Hi,
Can an unnumbered IP interface be configured on FreeBSD (4.5-Stable)?
Will Zebra and/or GateD (or RouteD) handle it properly?
Thanks,
MikeC
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-net in the body of the message
-Original Message-
From: Julian Elischer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 4:05 PM
To: Cambria, Mike
Cc: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject:Re: Unnumbered IP Interface
Unnumbered interfaces are not supported officially,
but it may still work..
A while ago
On Wed, 20 Mar 2002, Garrett Wollman wrote:
On Wed, 20 Mar 2002 15:01:01 -0600 (CST), Mike Silbersack [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
That would end up being a reduction below the current value; right now
sockets maxfiles with large maxuser values. Whether or not this is a
necessary
this with Bosko yet?
Mike Silby Silbersack
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-net in the body of the message
want to do the switchover at would be best; I don't see
any urgent need to rush the work.
Mike Silby Silbersack
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-net in the body of the message
Local Address
193/0/128 216.65.107.31.81 (queue len queue maxlen) !!!
That's entirely expected, and the reason why is visible in the source.
Mike Silby Silbersack
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-net in the body of the message
think it'd be best if you
kept the limits the same for now.
Once everything's UMA'd, then we can develop new sizing parameters.
Mike Silby Silbersack
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-net in the body of the message
On Wed, 20 Mar 2002, Garrett Wollman wrote:
On Wed, 20 Mar 2002 14:18:31 -0600 (CST), Mike Silbersack [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
We still need to cap the number of sockets somehow, as it would be bad for
sockets to consume all memory.
There's already a cap: maxfiles.
-GAWollman
to ask some more questions here, but it's
probably best that I actually look at the code first. :)
Mike Silby Silbersack
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-net in the body of the message
describe the problems encountered?
Mike Silby Silbersack
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-net in the body of the message
On Tue, 19 Mar 2002, Greg Black wrote:
Mike Silbersack wrote:
| Which PRs describe the problems encountered?
I have not submitted a PR yet. I have raised the problems on
the FreeBSD mailing lists several times since 4.4-RELEASE and
have had some correspondence with Warner Losh and Greg
before 4.5-release, and
should help your situation greatly.
If you are running 4.5, then I'm stumped.
Mike Silby Silbersack
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-net in the body of the message
-stable.
If this is just a load test and not real usage, you could also ignore the
problem for now; you'll have to make the determination.
Mike Silby Silbersack
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-net in the body of the message
into /Store/Mp3 and
/Store/Filter... but, i cant read/write into /Store itself although i can
browse /Store, thus far all the literature ive read seems to say i shouldnt
be having this problem.
Any ideas ?
--
Mike Woods
WoA SE Webmonkey General Dogsbody
Amiga North Thames Webmaster Games Co
to
worry about.
Mike Silby Silbersack
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-net in the body of the message
around the problem on certain chipsets, but everything
works well enough that I haven't been motivated to give them a serious
look.
Mike Silby Silbersack
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-net in the body of the message
) they are a no-go
unless someone puts significant work on them.
cheers
luigi
Whee! Ok, good to know.
Mike Silby Silbersack
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-net in the body of the message
to -current, but not -stable as of yet. I
suspect Warner will MFC the change in a few days. In the meantime, you
could try manually applying this diff to your system:
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/sys/dev/ep/if_ep.c.diff?r1=1.107r2=1.108
Mike Silby Silbersack
To Unsubscribe: send mail
the bottleneck and
fix it, I suspect you'll see the announcement here.
Mike Silby Silbersack
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-net in the body of the message
in Nov 2001 - that sender was resorting to
the costly Retransmission timeout even after receiving
many DupAcks.
Ok, I'll look at this in depth when I get some time.
Mike Silby Silbersack
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-net in the body of the message
in a tcpdump that you're interested in,
I'm sure that many people would be willing to help answer your questions.
Mike Silby Silbersack
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-net in the body of the message
Just curious but has anyone implemented a netgraph based web server?
---
Mike Wade ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-net in the body of the message
Just curious but has anyone implemented a netgraph based web server?
---
Mike Wade ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-net in the body of the message
Luigi, does this patch look good? AFAIK, the code you added should handle
printing errors in these two cases; is that correct?
Thanks,
Mike Silby Silbersack
--- if_fxp.cSun Feb 3 19:01:14 2002
+++ if_fxp.c.oldSun Feb 3 18:59:55 2002
@@ -1836,6 +1836,8 @@
if (m
Heh, I tend to diff in the wrong order a lot. I'll go ahead and get it
committed then.
Mike Silby Silbersack
On Sun, 3 Feb 2002, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
looks correct (apart from having to use patch -r to apply it...)
cheers
luigi
On Sun, Feb 03, 2002 at 07:03:20PM +, Mike
of natd. It works just fine.
This will suffice until I can figure out how to connect to a socket via a
tunnel endpoint which is also doing natd.
MikeC
-Original Message-
From: Cambria, Mike
Sent: Friday, January 04, 2002 4:09 PM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Cc: Cambria, Mike
I'm having problems connecting (e.g. telnet, ssh, ftp etc.) to a machine
which is at the other end of an IPsec tunnel. Passing data with machines,
via this tunnel, on subnets for which the tunnel endpoint is acting as a
router work just fine.
I'm using FreeBSD 4.4-Stable (cvsup'ed shortly
On Wed, 2 Jan 2002, Thomas Zenker wrote:
Hi Mike,
back from holidays...
because this is now discussed in different threads, on -stable and
on -net, I will try to recapitulate what has happened and keep this
on -net USB ethernet problem.
The performance problems apeared after updating
On Sun, 30 Dec 2001, Randall Stewart wrote:
Heh, you nailed the reverse of the problem we've seen: Right now the easy
way to cause exhaustion is to fill up _send_ buffers, via netkill. I
guess if we solve that problem, out of order segments could be used for an
attack too.
Mike
netkill. I
guess if we solve that problem, out of order segments could be used for an
attack too.
Just FWIW,
Mike Silby Silbersack
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-net in the body of the message
that you're confusing issues. Apple released a file system test
program which helped Matt Dillon to find and fix a bunch of NFS / UFS / VM
bugs, and Matt also fixed some TCP bugs, but there is no direct relation
between Apple and the TCP changes.
Mike Silby Silbersack
To Unsubscribe: send mail
manpage for details) and see if that
changes your results.
Also, is your USB adapter sharing interrupts with anything else? Are
interrupts being allocated the same way on 4.3 and 4.4?
Mike Silby Silbersack
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-net in the body
?
---Mike
Mike Tancsa ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Sentex Communications Corp,
Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
Given enough time, 100 monkeys on 100 routers
could setup a national IP network. (KDW2)
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-net in the body
cases.) I'm inclined to agree
that something between 2-4 would be a good value for our non-local
slowstart flightsize as well. Maybe after 4.5 is released we can go look
into it. (It's too late to be changing stuff now.)
Mike Silby Silbersack
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED
of the message
Mike Tancsa, tel +1 519 651 3400
Sentex Communications,[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Providing Internet since 1994www.sentex.net
Cambridge, Ontario
we'll commit the merged patch.
Mike Silby Silbersack
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-net in the body of the message
imported the SACK
support from OpenBSD. It needs a good looking over and testing, you
should be able to find it if you look back through the archives.
Mike Silby Silbersack
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-net in the body of the message
of maxfiles, and maxprocperuid to equal 9/10 maxproc; this'll help
to prevent a single process or user from forkbombing the system or running
it out of file handles with a default configuration.
Please review.
Thanks,
Mike Silby Silbersack
diff -u -r sys.old/alpha/alpha/machdep.c sys/alpha/alpha
it can be done better.
Regards,
Mike
--
... every activity meets with opposition, everyone who acts has his
rivals and unfortunately opponents also. But not because people want
to be opponents, rather because the tasks and relationships force
people to take different points of view. [Dr. Fritz
. With the prices of switches being so low
(especially used), its almost cheaper to make a 24 port network card as
opposed to something like the quad port D-link.
---Mike
Mike Tancsa, tel +1 519 651
Hi, just as an FYI, I did some simple tests using netperf of the polling
code. On first blush, it does look quite nice. I am going to try and
simulate what the effect is under network load while at the same time,
trying to bring up a BGP peer with a full view.
Machine A is a PIII 800 with
At 09:09 AM 11/27/01 -0800, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
On Tue, Nov 27, 2001 at 11:56:45AM -0500, Mike Tancsa wrote:
Hi, just as an FYI, I did some simple tests using netperf of the polling
code. On first blush, it does look quite nice. I am going to try and
well, the throughput numbers seems
At 09:09 AM 11/27/01 -0800, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
On Tue, Nov 27, 2001 at 11:56:45AM -0500, Mike Tancsa wrote:
Hi, just as an FYI, I did some simple tests using netperf of the polling
code. On first blush, it does look quite nice. I am going to try and
well, the throughput numbers seems
question, but does 4.x actually have the M_ZERO
functionality?
If so, syncing these changes to 4.x seems like a good idea.
Mike Silby Silbersack
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-net in the body of the message
for this code! Are there any particular compile time options one
should use ? e.g. HZ=1000 etc ? The box in question would be running Zebra
and BGPd and forwarding lots-o-packets with lots-o-routes (100k+)
---Mike
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd
connection, I need to
do ifconfig rl0 media 10baseT/UTP. Try in your /etc/rc.conf instead of just
ifconfig_rl0='up'
try
ifconfig_rl0='media 10baseT/UTP up'
Without doing this, ifconfig rl0 shows a media type of none and the
connection does not function properly.
---Mike
Mike Tancsa ([EMAIL
can see a check for expiry.
What revision of the code are you looking at? Some related behavior was
changed relatively recently.
Mike Silby Silbersack
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-net in the body of the message
to. I wouldn't worry about the longer than expected
expiration though; expiration of cloned routes isn't the issue here; the
routing code should be invalidating the existing cloned routes when the
new route appears. (Apparently this is not happening in your situation.)
Mike Silby Silbersack
their system. (Just look back through mailing list archives to see how
man tweaks people are making that shouldn't be made.)
Mike Silby Silbersack
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-net in the body of the message
delay
Hi,
Can you give some more details as to where this introduces
performance problems, and if so, how is the best way to work around it?
---Mike
Mike Tancsa ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Sentex Communications Corp,
Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
Given enough time
Hi,
According to this link at the SBE website (
http://www.sbei.net/linux_bsd.htm# http://www.sbei.net/linux_bsd.htm# ),
OpenBSD v2.9 and NetBSD v1.6 now include SBEI drivers. I'm curious why
FreeBSD isn't included. Is it simply an oversight or is there a reason
(e.g. driver doesn't work
the problem you're seeing.
If it's being used, you'll see that one IP is eating up all the buffers.
Mike Silby Silbersack
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-net in the body of the message
it this weekend for the dc
driver, but it looks like Luigi's work overshadows that.
The idea proposed above is (similar to) LRP, which Terry implemented for
clickarray. It is not in his patchset.
Mike Silby Silbersack
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-net
. In the process of writing this patch, did you copy any
section of code from the Linux driver? If possible, it would be best to
avoid any GPL entanglements.
Mike Silby Silbersack
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-net in the body of the message
for it some day. In either case, it doesn't matter
anymore. We're using strong sequence numbers, and ip-based authentication
has many better replacements now.
Mike Silby Silbersack
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-net in the body of the message
for a buffer overflow to exploit. Syn floods are alive and well, though.
Mike Silby Silbersack
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-net in the body of the message
first to see what works best.
---Mike
Mike Tancsa, tel +1 519 651 3400
Sentex Communications,[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Providing Internet since 1994
On Mon, 15 Oct 2001 23:00:27 + (UTC), in sentex.lists.freebsd.net you
wrote:
Mike Tancsa writes:
If the forwarding path is maxed out, then it is the application layer's
responsibility to back off (think TCP).
Is it better for the networking layer to deal with this (potentially
to see if this interval rings a bell with anyone.
---Mike
Mike Tancsa, tel +1 519 651 3400
Sentex Communications,[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Providing Internet since
some latency at the network layer so
the apps dont have to deal with it.
Forgive me if my questions are simplistic, I am just trying to get as much
info to make a more informed decision as how to best configure my network
given the resources I have.
---Mike
To Unsubscribe: send mail
will
effect the rate of packet drops. If it is resource related I should see a
difference.
---Mike
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-net in the body of the message
?
Pinging is an excellent way to determine latency.
I guess then its only at the worst case where I would see the added
latency as I dont see any difference by adjusting the queue size.
---Mike
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-net in the body
701 - 800 of 903 matches
Mail list logo
