Andre Oppermann wrote:
> The other side is retransmitting data we have already received
> and acknowledged ... That behavior is totally non-compliant.
Any chance our ack of that data got dropped/lost enroute, and the
other side is resending after timing out?
_
Eugene Grosbein wrote:
> 27.12.2011 20:11, per...@pluto.rain.com ?:
> > Jason Hellenthal wrote:
> >>
> >> See siftr(4). This module writes to a file.
> >
> > Is siftr(4) new since 8.1?
>
> HISTORY
> SIFTR first appeared in FreeBSD 7.4 and FreeBSD 8.2.
which explains why there's no man
Jason Hellenthal wrote:
>
> See siftr(4). This module writes to a file.
Is siftr(4) new since 8.1?
$ man siftr
No manual entry for siftr
$ cd /usr/ports
$ ls -d */*siftr*
ls: */*siftr*: No such file or directory
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org ma
YongHyeon PYUN wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 10:07:02AM -0400, Karim wrote:
> > ... why are we ORing the same call twice isn't the same thing
> > as calling it once:
> >
> > bmsr = PHY_READ(sc, E1000_SR) | PHY_READ(sc, E1000_SR);
>
> The E1000_SR_LINK_STATUS bit is latched low so it should be
Kevin Oberman wrote:
> ... Years ago, when coaxial Ethernet the norm ...
Aha! Another old-timer who has been around long enough to remember
10Mb Ethernet! Maybe something in the following will ring a bell?
I have a (to me) very strange problem, for which I have a usable
workaround but no actu
Steve Polyack wrote:
> I was able to "fix" the single-user mode behavior (which I agree,
> isn't necessarily broken) and get it to bring up the links by
> simply patching init(8) to call system("/sbin/ifconfig") before
> prompting for the single-user shell. It works, but I feel dirty.
I see no
Steve Polyack wrote:
> ... An occaisional fat-finger in /etc/fstab may cause one to
> end up in single-user mode ... some of these systems have a LOM
> (lights-out management) controller which shares the system's
> on-board NICs ... when the system drops out of init(8) and into
> single-user mode
Chuck Swiger wrote:
> People tend to take advantage of the resources they have; if you
> have an EMC or NetApp filer handy, it's might well be reasonable
> to use it ...
s/reasonable/tempting/
"When the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem tends to
resemble a nail."
___
Chuck Swiger wrote:
> It's fairly common to scale up a mail infrastructure from one box
> handling both SMTP and IMAP (or POP) to a SMTP-only box writing to
> NFS-mounted user mailboxes, and have one or more dedicated reader
> boxes which only run IMAP/POP daemons which access that same NFS
> fil
Jack Vogel wrote:
> There are pros and cons either way you do things. I was talking
> to some of our Linux crew, they recently changed things so it
> would shut down the phy, but that doesn't always make everyone
> happy either.
In particular, depending on the type of switch and how it is
config
> The following reply was made to PR usb/149039; it has been noted
> by GNATS.
>
> From: Fredrik Lindberg
> To: bug-follo...@freebsd.org, pilzablei...@web.de
> Cc: Hans Petter Selasky
> Subject: Re: usb/149039: [uhso] Binding problem with uhso
> Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2010 15:00:07 +0200
>
> I appare
wrote:
> I forgot send last time - on the other side is cisco router ...
Perhaps vpnc would be easier to set up than raccoon?
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail t
rascal wrote:
> ... I have two sites, one with a cisco device and one with a
> server running freebsd 7.2. The client wants to connect the two
> sites using these devices and I am told that the best way would
> be to establish an IPSEC tunnel between the cisco device and the
> freebsd server. Th
Rui Paulo wrote:
> On 1 Mar 2009, at 21:26, Julian Elischer wrote:
> > Luigi Rizzo wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >> I am planning to split netinet/ip_fw2.c in a number of smaller
> >> files to make it more manageable, and while i do this I would
> >> also like to move the files related to ipfw2 (namely ip_fw*
> Any suggestions similar to visio for unix?
graphics/dia is the closest approximation I know of.
It might work to run Visio itself under wine.
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe
Ian Smith wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Jan 2009, per...@pluto.rain.com wrote:
>
> > Why would a local interface, reported as up in ifconfig, not respond
> > to a ping of its own IP address? The tun0 reported below doesn't,
...
> > $ ifconfig -a
...
> > tun0: flags=8051 mtu 1412
> > inet
> Had a quick look at http://www.unix-ag.uni-kl.de/~massar/vpnc/ but
> don't get whether it, or you, are configuring ppp? ie, does vpnc
> make or mess with /etc/ppp/ppp.conf? Or otherwise invoke ppp
> directly itself?
Neither, I suspect. Looking at the ppp(8) manpage, it looks as if
both vpnc a
Ian Smith wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Jan 2009, per...@pluto.rain.com wrote:
> > Ian Smith wrote:
>
> uucp .. how quaint :)
Yep, but running over ssh since agora no longer has modems.
How's that for a mix of ancient and modern technology? :)
> > http://www.cs.rpi.edu/~flemej/fbsd-cisco-vpn.pdf
>
>
Ian Smith wrote:
...
> > tun0: flags=8051 mtu 1412
> > inet6 fe80::2b0:d0ff:fe28:ad4f%tun0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x4
> > inet ZZZ.ZZZ.233.42 --> ZZZ.ZZZ.233.42 netmask 0x
> > Opened by PID 24635
>
> I don't know if this is relevant or not, but I've never
Why would a local interface, reported as up in ifconfig, not respond
to a ping of its own IP address? The tun0 reported below doesn't,
and I have no idea how to debug it. (I've overwritten the two most-
significant octets of its IP address, which is Class B, so as not to
publicly identify the net
20 matches
Mail list logo
