Julian Elischer wrote:
>
> try swapping the addresses on the interface.
The original posting said that 10.0.0.99 is an address assigned to a
CARP interface, not an alias assigned to an ethernet interface. As
such, both are primary addresses on their respective interfaces, so
there is nothing to
M. Warner Losh wrote:
In message: <4b6e2b40.1070...@elischer.org>
Julian Elischer writes:
: M. Warner Losh wrote:
: > I have a problem. All systems are running freebsd-current form
: > sometime in the last month, although similar systems running
: > 8.0-RELEASE exhibit exactly the s
M. Warner Losh wrote:
In message: <4b6e2b40.1070...@elischer.org>
Julian Elischer writes:
: M. Warner Losh wrote:
: > I have a problem. All systems are running freebsd-current form
: > sometime in the last month, although similar systems running
: > 8.0-RELEASE exhibit exactly the s
In message: <4b6e2b40.1070...@elischer.org>
Julian Elischer writes:
: M. Warner Losh wrote:
: > I have a problem. All systems are running freebsd-current form
: > sometime in the last month, although similar systems running
: > 8.0-RELEASE exhibit exactly the same problem. rpc.lockd
In message: <4b6e2b40.1070...@elischer.org>
Julian Elischer writes:
: M. Warner Losh wrote:
: > I have a problem. All systems are running freebsd-current form
: > sometime in the last month, although similar systems running
: > 8.0-RELEASE exhibit exactly the same problem. rpc.lockd
M. Warner Losh wrote:
I have a problem. All systems are running freebsd-current form
sometime in the last month, although similar systems running
8.0-RELEASE exhibit exactly the same problem. rpc.lockd on an NFS
client is doing something that baffles my mind entirely, maybe you can
help. Pleas
I have a problem. All systems are running freebsd-current form
sometime in the last month, although similar systems running
8.0-RELEASE exhibit exactly the same problem. rpc.lockd on an NFS
client is doing something that baffles my mind entirely, maybe you can
help. Please bear with me, this is
