On Mon, Aug 11, 2008 at 02:03:31PM +0100, Pete French wrote:
> Pyun YongHyeon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Try attached patch and check whether bce(4) correctly reports link
> > state changes.
> >
> > After seeing 'link state changed to UP' message, unplug the cable
> > and see whether it r
Pyun YongHyeon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Try attached patch and check whether bce(4) correctly reports link
> state changes.
>
> After seeing 'link state changed to UP' message, unplug the cable
> and see whether it reports link DOWN. The message should be printed
> in a second. Also try replugg
On Fri, 8 Aug 2008, Oliver Fromme wrote:
Andrew Thompson wrote:
> Pete French wrote:
> > > The bce driver is not properly generating link state events.
> >
> > OK, that explains why it doesnt failover - but why does looking at it
> > with ifconfig make a difference ? surely that should be 'rea
On Fri, Aug 08, 2008 at 03:18:36PM +0200, Oliver Fromme wrote:
> Andrew Thompson wrote:
> > Pete French wrote:
> > > > The bce driver is not properly generating link state events.
> > >
> > > OK, that explains why it doesnt failover - but why does looking at it
> > > with ifconfig make a diff
On Fri, Aug 08, 2008 at 04:00:56PM +0200, Marian Hettwer wrote:
> Hi Oliver,
>
> On Fri, 8 Aug 2008 15:18:36 +0200 (CEST), Oliver Fromme
> >
> > Shouldn't that be considered a security flaw? After all,
> > you can perform "ifconfig $IF" inside a jail to list the
> > interface configuration, but
On Fri, 8 Aug 2008, Oliver Fromme wrote:
> Andrew Thompson wrote:
> > ifconfig will cause the media status to be read from the hardware at
> > which time the link change is generated as it is different to the stored
> > value.
>
> Shouldn't that be considered a security flaw? After all,
> you
Hi Oliver,
On Fri, 8 Aug 2008 15:18:36 +0200 (CEST), Oliver Fromme
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Andrew Thompson wrote:
> > Pete French wrote:
> > > > The bce driver is not properly generating link state events.
> > >
> > > OK, that explains why it doesnt failover - but why does looking at
it
>
Andrew Thompson wrote:
> Pete French wrote:
> > > The bce driver is not properly generating link state events.
> >
> > OK, that explains why it doesnt failover - but why does looking at it
> > with ifconfig make a difference ? surely that should be 'read only ?
>
> ifconfig will cause the
On Thu, Aug 07, 2008 at 05:27:53PM +0100, Pete French wrote:
> I have a very odd problem here - two interfaces bundled using lagg
> in 'failover' mode, so one interface is active and the other not being
> used. if the carrier drops on the active one I expect it to
> failover, but it doesnt.
>
On Thu, Aug 07, 2008 at 06:11:58PM +0100, Pete French wrote:
> > The bce driver is not properly generating link state events.
>
> OK, that explains why it doesnt failover - but why does looking at it
> with ifconfig make a difference ? surely that should be 'read only ?
ifconfig will cause the me
On Thu, Aug 07, 2008 at 05:27:53PM +0100, Pete French wrote:
> I have a very odd problem here - two interfaces bundled using lagg
> in 'failover' mode, so one interface is active and the other not being
> used. if the carrier drops on the active one I expect it to
> failover, but it doesnt.
>
> ..
> The bce driver is not properly generating link state events.
OK, that explains why it doesnt failover - but why does looking at it
with ifconfig make a difference ? surely that should be 'read only ?
-pete.
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
I have a very odd problem here - two interfaces bundled using lagg
in 'failover' mode, so one interface is active and the other not being
used. if the carrier drops on the active one I expect it to
failover, but it doesnt.
...until I type 'ifconfig bce0' to look at the status of the interface
whic
13 matches
Mail list logo
