On 12.09.2018 16:17, Sergio R. Caprile wrote:
[..]
"ESP" (whatever it is)
I guess ESP is Espressif, the vendor of ESP32? But I'm lost on the rest.
Again, please clarify your scenario.
Right, I can't help with the information provided, either.
Simon
On 14.08.2018 14:49, Amena El Homsi wrote:
When we receive an echo request using IPv6, LwIP copies the request to
new pbuf to send the reply.
Why LwIP doesn't use the echo request pbuf, instead of allocating a
new one (as what LwIP does when replying to IPv4 echo requests)?
Ehrm, I don't know
On 08.08.2018 12:05, Johnny23 wrote:
Hello everybody,
Is it possible to enable/disable the ICMP replies at the runtime of the
system without any change in the LWIP source code? It's required for the
security on my project. I saw that the constant LWIP_ICMP can be used but it
has to be set before
On 08.08.2018 11:51, Amena El Homsi wrote:
Hi,
Can we support sockets using RAW API without Socket API?
Sockets are provided by socket API, so no, you can't use sockets without
the socket API.
RAW API can work without socket API, but it uses pcbs, not sockets.
Simon
On 05.08.2018 02:09, Richard Man wrote:
OK, I believe I found the source of the bug
If you found a bug in our mbedtls adaption, could you please send a
patch? It's not really clear from your mail what should be changed.
Aside from that, it worked for me, so this is somewhat strange...
On 03.08.2018 09:36, Richard Man wrote:
Hi Simon or others, I am attempting to build 2.1.0 RC1 with ALTCP,
specifically with the mbedTLS 2.12.0. Looks like I need to map the
function pointers in altcp_tcp.h to the mbedTLS functions, but if
there is a working example that I can leverage, I
On 03.08.2018 09:08, Richard Man wrote:
Wow! Amazingly enough, sandwiching mbedTLS between MQTT and TCP is
EXACTLY what I need to do next! I have mbedTLS ported working with
lwIP and my RTOS (REXIS).
This should save time a bit of time. Thanks!
I just noticed I cannot find an example :-(
On 03.08.2018 08:55, Richard Man wrote:
I meant lwIP 2.0.3, but yes you are correct, 2.1.0 RC1 does have a
fix, as well as using "altcp_" instead of "tcp_" function names. Must
be something new
Those "altcp_" functions allow layering SSL between MQTT and TCP. There
sghould be an example
On 02.08.2018 22:16, Richard Man wrote:
The MQTT connect function is missing code to check for optional
username/passwd and add the info to the header. The fix is trivial,
and I will see if I can send it to the official people when I have the
chance.
Version 2.0.2 is rather old. I think what
On 25.07.2018 08:01, josephjah wrote:
Hello, I'm trying to assign a static /128 address to a netif but I think I'm
doing something wrong. I'm using 2.0.3 (also tested latest mater). I can see
packets are being correctly received but when ethip6_output() is called it
can't seem to find the proper
On 25.07.2018 12:10, Zsolt Nagy wrote:
Hello Everyone,
I'm using a Texas Instruments RM57L843 microcontroller and I would
like to communicate with it from the PC. I managed to set up
communication with static IP, and successfully pinged the controller.
I'm using the drivers provided by TI.
The 1st release candidate version for lwIP 2.1.0 is now available via
git (using the STABLE-2_1_0_RC1 tags in both repositories) or via these
gitweb links:
core:http://git.savannah.nongnu.org/cgit/lwip.git/snapshot/lwip-STABLE-2_1_0_RC1.tar.gz
On 05.07.2018 16:18, Nenad Pekez wrote:
[..]
I don't think any calls to lwIP are made from an ISR.
Yes, that looks good so far from what you wrote. I'm afraid I don't have
any more ideas now. You'll have to try and debug it yourself. E.g. set a
breakpoint at when the stats underflow happens.
On 04.07.2018 16:41, Nenad Pekez wrote:
quick update: iperf client on PC was trying to connect on the same 5001
port, thus the mentioned error was reported.
I don't understand. But it seems irrelevant?
Now, there is a full-duplex communication, however, the one which is
first achieved is
On 28.06.2018 15:10, Amena El Homsi wrote:
I went over LwIP code and the only memory error I saw is that when
p->payload ptr < pbuf ptr. Since our data memory addresses are
always less than the frame memory addresses we will not face this
issue because p->payload ptr will always be greater
On 27.06.2018 16:12, R. Diez wrote:
I must admit that I am always in a rush. Did I miss some place in the
documentation where this is explained?
Hmm dunno, I haven't read the docs lately ;-)
If there's somthing missing in the docs you discover here on the list,
please don't hesitate to send a
On 27.06.2018 13:31, R. Diez wrote:
It does. Input pbufs are PBUF_POOL pbufs which consume a constant memory size.
I'm no expert,
Yet you try to sound like one ;-)
but that sounds wrong. If the remote computer decides to
send very small chunks, lwIP is going to waste memory fast.
No. On
On 26.06.2018 15:15, R. Diez wrote:
[..]
However, if we now consider IP reassembly, a single reassembled packet
can already get over that 32 KiB memory limit, right? I believe that a
single UDP packet can be up to roughly 64 KiB long. An attacker can
exhaust the whole lwIP memory with just 1 or
On 26.06.2018 16:55, Nenad Pekez wrote:
[..]
we have been measuring throughput between PC Windows 7 and Zynq device
using iperf applications.
[..]
In attachments I provide:
* iperf_throughput.png - screenshot of iperf measurements,
* lwipopts.h - our lwIP configuration file and
*
On 21.06.2018 17:52, Jagdish wrote:
Hi,
Am using lwIP stack with STM32F4 series micro-controller in one of project
board. Trying to connect this board to pc based application. I observed,
When host sends packet of size 1088 bytes, the packet gets divided into 2.
Please refer the packet where
On 21.06.2018 09:42, Patrick van Broeckhuijsen wrote:
Many thanks for already pushing this early version of the client
implementation!
Actually, the client now works for me. You can't pass in all the
options, yet (e.g. only 10 second test, local server port is 5001 for
dual/tradeoff), but
On 20.06.2018 09:49, R. Diez wrote:
My TCP/IP and lwIP expertise are limited. Please help me understand
the situation by correcting my assumptions:
- The Ethernet driver has a fixed, limited number of DMA slots, so it
already limits the amount of data at that level.
- An Ethernet frame is
On 19.06.2018 18:11, Sergio R. Caprile wrote:
UDP datagrams are carried by Ethernet frames. It is not lwIP but your
driver who allocates memory to hold those frames before handling them to
lwIP, which in turn will deliver to your application. The only way to
stop allocation is there.
Someone
On 15.06.2018 20:24, Patrick van Broeckhuijsen wrote:
Any thoughts about the client implementation for lwIP of iperf?
I'Ve just pushed a patch that starts implementing client mode in lwiperf.
I've had this lying around for a while now, but it's only the tx side
for now (no dual or tradeoff
On 15.06.2018 15:34, Yigal Hochberg wrote:
Hi Dirk,
Somewhat related, I like and use the lwip-contrib/ports/win32
Specifically mingw/Makefile. I was surprised to see it was gone (unified).
It is very convenient to build a test app using mingw/Makefile.
Dirk has started to create cmake files
On 15.06.2018 09:45, Kamil Khoury wrote:
Hi,
I was able to find something on the internet which allows to implement
layer 2 protocols in a socket using the SOCK_RAW. Unfortunately, this
is a linux library which is described here:
http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man7/packet.7.html
Packet
On 14.06.2018 16:13, Kamil Khoury wrote:
I can distinguish the two logical Ethernet ports I created by
netif_add() by giving them two different MAC addresses but the problem
is that the destination MAC of all received messages is a MULTICAST
address which means, the two logical interfaces
As Sergio suggested, let's continue this on lwip-users.
On 14.06.2018 14:58, goldsi...@gmx.de wrote:
On 14.06.2018 14:51, Kamil Khoury wrote:
Hi,
My application requires having two logical Ethernet interfaces on the
same physical port (as shown in the image).
[.. embedded image, see
http
On 14.06.2018 08:46, Amena El Homsi wrote:
In tcp_write() function, why we don't allocate segments bigger than
half the maximum window we ever received?
Is this a LwIP requirement or TCP protocol requirement?
This is to achieve decent throughput with remote hosts implementing
delayed ack.
On 13.06.2018 16:20, Elinux wrote:
You say that we can implement an SSH server on our embraqué system using
sockets, I did not understand too much and how to proceed! do you have any
leads, or concrete examples with other protocols other than SSH that you
know,
No sorry, I do lwIP stuff, not
On 07.06.2018 13:38, Wolcendorf, Marcin wrote:
Did you consider making pbuf a separate library?
No, not yet. But it's an interesting idea...
I would like to use it in a project, that has 2 builds – one with
LwIP, one without. ATM I would have to link LwIP in each case, which
to me does not
On 06.06.2018 16:23, Joel Cunningham wrote:
On 06/06/2018 07:45 AM, goldsi...@gmx.de wrote:
On 06.06.2018 11:42, R. Diez wrote:
[..]
The trouble is, this changes the connection state (pcb->state) from
ESTABLISHED to FIN_WAIT_1, which then turns quickly into FIN_WAIT_2.
Afterwards, TCP k
On 06.06.2018 11:42, R. Diez wrote:
[..]
The trouble is, this changes the connection state (pcb->state) from
ESTABLISHED to FIN_WAIT_1, which then turns quickly into FIN_WAIT_2.
Afterwards, TCP keep-alive does not work anymore, because of this logic
in tcp_slowtmr():
/* Check if KEEPALIVE
On 22.05.2018 11:16, Jan Menzel wrote:
Hi Dave!
What you described looks like a bridge to me. If you don't have to
process tcp/udp packets (send an receive data from your local device)
you don't need lwip.
+1 from me. This looks like hacking a proprietary way. The only answer
I'll
On 21.05.2018 22:49, yac...@dds-security.com wrote:
Does LwIP support IEEE 802.1x?
As Sergio wrote (and although this is an interesting protocol), this is
out of scope for lwIP. We (mainly) handle IPv4 and IPv6 and upper
protocols. 802.1X is on a lower level.
Simon
On 22.05.2018 11:11, Giuseppe Modugno wrote:
I'm not sure. Is there a decoding function for URI?
I mean, a function that converts %20 and similar escape codes in the
corresponding ASCII char.
Our httpd does not (yet?) support this. If you really need spaces in
URLs on your server, you need
On 15.05.2018 18:18, Claude Robitaille wrote:
Hi Simon,
I am not sure if this is the correct way (contacting you directly)
Actually, it's not. Please write to the list instead. There may be more
people looking for the same thing and writing to the list ensures
everyone can read it and find
On 15.05.2018 08:15, sarp wrote:
What is the difference between LwIP PPPoS libraries?
Which one should I use, that the STM32CubeMX gives or that the examples
based on?
If you ask here, the answer is: use the official lwIP sources, latest
version. Use git master currently if possible. The next
On 14.05.2018 18:27, Keith Rubow wrote:
[..] I would like to have additional connection
attempts to be refused. I can achieve this behavior only by closing the
listening pcb once I reach the max number of connections, but then I
can't re-open the listening pcb until ALL open connections are
On 28.04.2018 16:54, Sebastian Gniazdowski wrote:
I would want to send ARP package manually and then check how arp_table
changed. How to accomplish this, should I use ethernet_output()?
You could use 'etharp_request()'. But that should also be clear from
reading the docs at
On 26.04.2018 19:49, alweib wrote:
I'm having an issue sharing a TCP socket between two tasks in FreeRTOS (v.
7.0) and LWIP(v. 1.40).
The versions of both lwIP and FreeRTOS you are using are pretty old. At
least lwIP has numerous bugs fixed since then.
[..]
It should be noted that i read
On 25.04.2018 20:41, Sebastian Gniazdowski wrote:
[..]
However, now I've discovered that if I change the *_CHECK define to 0
or 1, then ca. 13000 packets are correctly sent, and after that the
only packets sent are frequent (in each second) ARP queries (discovery
of gate's MAC), as captured
On 23.04.2018 17:08, Sergio R. Caprile wrote:
Take a look at frame #22, my Wireshark says "previous segment info not
captured" and its SEQ is 216.
Previous device frame in capture is #19 with SEQ 178 and len 21, which
is consistent with the PC ACKing 199 in frames #20/21.
There is a missing
On 23.04.2018 17:18, Patrick Klos wrote:
[..]
Thinking about the retransmission from PC side:
Shouldn't lwip also do a retransmission of the lost frame?
You know, these bytes never get acknowledged by PC.
Yes, the LwIP side should have retransmitted the packet. Packet 21 of
the trace file
On 19.04.2018 14:45, thomasfogh wrote:
I've changed my IPv4 only application to be IPv6 only.
Right now it doesn't do anything but try to get an IPv6 address.
What's your setting for LWIP_IPV6_MLD? I think I remember that you must
explicitly join the "allnodes" group for this to work
On 12.04.2018 14:57, cookies_do wrote:
Thank you for your answer. Yes, I have looked at it.
So you might have noticed that someone has used Doxygen to generate the
documentation? ;-)
As I said, I am new with Doxygen and lwIP. Thats why I ask this question.
Call 'doc/doxygen/generate.sh'
On 10.04.2018 22:04, Adrian Figueroa wrote:
Ok, I do not usually take captures, so I did not know I can shorten
them. I will try next time.
You can. Check the options you have in "File" --> "export special
packets..." (translated from my german GUI).
Simon
On 10.04.2018 16:53, Adrian Figueroa wrote:
[..]
I had to upload them here, because they were rejected as an attachment
due to size.
That's not really true. You had to upload the files because noone wants
to load ~300 kByte into their mail inbox just because you're too lazy to
strip down
On 10.04.2018 16:53, Adrian Figueroa wrote:
[..]I think, this problem is not caused by Lwip itself but probably a
configuration error or some buffer that runs full. Maybe even a speed
issue of the processor.
I think it's a processor speed issue. Lost packets could be an lwIP
configuration
On 06.04.2018 15:30, Adrian Figueroa wrote:
I am writing a bootloader application that receives data over ethernet
for flashing the processor it runs on. This is implemented on an
STM32F746 running the ChibiOS-RTOS and the HAL drivers that come with
it. Consequently, the netconn-api is used. I
On 06.04.2018 11:56, thomasfogh wrote:
I'm currently running an IPv4-only socket application with DHCP on my
STM32F407 board and need to switch to IPv6 only with SLAAC.
I can't find any example code for an IPv6-only socket application.
Can anyone point me in the right direction on how to
On 05.04.2018 20:29, Keith Rubow wrote:
I am trying to use lwip on ARM cortex M4. My development software is
Atollic Truestudio on Win10. So far I have gotten lwip 1.4.1 to work
using raw api and a simple multitasking OS.
Now I am trying to change over to lwip 2.0.3, and am having trouble with
On 05.04.2018 16:24, antonio wrote:
I have a small application using MDNS, and I use the loopback interface.
At the beginning the Thread1 starts the MDNS process,
Wait, why are you talking about threads? You are using the callback API
of lwIP, right? There should not be more than one thread
On 01.04.2018 01:26, Oldrich Kepka wrote:
we run lwip-1.4.0 on PPC440 and experience rare random hanging of TCP
Two things that I think are worth noting:
a) 1.4.0 is really old. There have been numerous fixes since that. Can
you reproduce the issue with current git master?
b) 1.4.0 does not
On 30.03.2018 13:01, simeon.trifo...@amk-drives.bg wrote:
I replaced the function dhcp_renew() with dhcp_network_changed(). After
power on, the dhcp works fine again (the complete log is attached). The
first strange thing for me is the ARPs that follow. The devices askes who
has IP address
On 30.03.2018 10:40, simeon.trifo...@amk-drives.bg wrote:
[..]
Now I'm trying to reconnect the Ethernet cable to another network (different
address area). The device sends a DHCP request which is a broadcast, but the
source is the IP address of the device from the former network and probably
as
On 29.03.2018 18:27, santosh wrote:
I apologize for digging into an old thred.
Is there a page which had been built to show which commercial products/OEMs
have used LWIP in them?
None that I know of. Unfortunately, people don't come here to tell which
version of lwIP they released in a
On 29.03.2018 19:51, Roger Cover wrote:
Is there an example of how to use AUTOIP and DHCP at the same time?
Yes, have a look at the win32 port in contrib.
I have had DHCP in my application for some time, but a customer now requires
that I add AUTOIP as well.
I am having difficulty making
On 27.03.2018 00:37, JM wrote:
[..]
Looking into ethernet_input(), p->ref is sometimes 1 and p->tot_len =
63 after ip_input(p, netif) (in my situation anyway) BUT p->tot_len
was 107 before ip_input(p, netif); was called! This seems odd to me as
I thought the pbuf is completely consumed and
On 24.03.2018 07:26, joc...@strohbeck.net wrote:
[..]
Attached is the pcap file. All I can tell is that the header and payload
is split into 2 packets and using curl and labview the 2nd packet is
received after a huge delay. I tested --no-delay and --no-buffer and
added manually keep-alive to
On 23.03.2018 20:50, Jochen Strohbeck wrote:
[..]
I am able to reproduce the same problem using curl on windows and found
out that even a PUT request with only a single byte payload takes about
a second! If I do the same request with python it takes some
milliseconds. Why?
I guess the problem
On 17.03.2018 00:08, Keith Rubow wrote:
I am trying to use LwIP for the first time, and am having trouble
figuring out what I need to do to properly initialize it.
I am trying to run LwIP version 1.4.1
Hell, 1.4.1 is more than five years old. If you start something new, use
*at least* 2.0.3!
On 14.03.2018 16:42, Giuseppe Modugno wrote:
I was experimenting with lwip memory allocator. I defined:
#define MEM_LIBC_MALLOC 0
#define MEM_USE_POOLS 0
#define MEM_SIZE (32 * 1024)
#define LWIP_RAM_HEAP_POINTER ( (void *)0x2007C000 )
I'm using LPC1768 that has a 32kB SRAM block
On 14.03.2018 17:09, Giuseppe Modugno wrote:
#define MEM_LIBC_MALLOC 1
If I try to set MEMP_MEM_MALLOC, I have some strange problems.
I suspect threading issues. I checked on win32 and it seems to work
fine. In the end, there's not really much lwIP does here, everything is
delegated to
On 12.03.2018 22:27, Brian dina wrote:
Hello,
I am using a Xilinx board with a Microblaze processor to run the
echo_server example code. I noticed that if I send 8 bytes at one
second intervals that the delay from packets sent and packets received
begins to grow. I don't feel like its a
On 13.03.2018 16:21, Giuseppe Modugno wrote:
I have ip4_addr_t and I want to set it to a "null"/invalid value. Is it
better to use IPADDR_NONE or IPADDR_ANY?
ANY! NONE is all ones and is only used in parsing functions returning
"this is not a valid IP address".
This is derived from
On 07.03.2018 17:40, Mattia Settin wrote:
[..]
The question is:
It is now mandatory define/use sys_now() ?
You can do without, but a number of features new to 2.0.x (or improved
there) require it. Right now, the list is:
- timeouts for NO_SYS==1
- LWIP_SO_SNDTIMEO
- LWIP_SO_LINGER
- lwiperf
On 06.03.2018 04:24, lukasz139 wrote:
[..]
Is there any smart way to investigate that? Checking if any firewall on my
way blocks?
The best thing you can do when developing ethernet devices is to get
yourself a TAP to see what your device sends and receives. If buying one
is too expensive,
On 05.03.2018 14:41, Mattia Settin wrote:
Dear All,
I need to know the remote ip (remote_ip) of a speficif socket.
Now i call the get_socket (removing the static attribute) and then
point to the remote_ip:
psock = get_socket(index);
psock->conn->pcb.tcp->remote_ip.addr;
The bad thing is that
On 03.03.2018 23:30, JM wrote:
So now the only entry into lwIP is through low_level_input(). I've
spent a good deal of time trying to debug this and where I got stuck
was in tcp_receive() where it calls pbuf_clen(), which returns
MEMP_NUM_PBUF and that's where the underflow originates. If I
On 03.03.2018 16:26, JM wrote:
Hi thanks for the reply. My main loop consists of while(1); only. Only
the stack is running on the microcontroller and all interrupts going
into lwIP (Ethernet Rx and periodic timer)
So are you sure you enter lwIP functions only from one interrupt priority?
With
. no PHY or hardware issue), try
wireshark to see what's wrong.
Simon
On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 11:39 AM, goldsimon <goldsi...@gmx.de
<mailto:goldsi...@gmx.de>> wrote:
Chris Seto wrote:
>I have a custom board with an STM32F4, and a TLK110 running LwIP
2.0.3.
>Th
On 27.02.2018 16:32, Yacob Hassidim wrote:
Hello,
I want to wait till at least 3 bytes were received by TCP.
How the TCP minimum received bytes for callback is configured?
That's not supported. You'll have to queue the rx pbufs yourself in your
recv callback.
Simon
On 26.02.2018 16:51, Giuseppe Modugno wrote:
I read the examples in lwip-contrib, mainly genfiles_example.c. The
dynamic memory allocated for the file content is freed in
fs_close_custom(). However I couldn't explain why.
Indeed, mostly if the content is small, it is completely sent in
On 25.02.2018 16:28, Yacob Hassidim wrote:
Helo Simon,
Thank you for referring me to lwip-contrib.
I downloaded the version contrib-2.0.1.
I found that LWIP_DEBUG is defined as compilation parameters of
project layer.
Exactly.
I didn’t find mention of LWIP_PLATFORM_DIAG.
I use LwIP
On 21.02.2018 20:22, Jan Menzel wrote:
If you want your client application to load-balance although the locally
cached DNS entry has expired, I think a better approach would be to
actually return all available IPs to the client and let it chose one
(i.e. implement the random algorithm in your
On 21.02.2018 17:18, Jan Menzel wrote:
Hi all!
I'd like to share a small patch with you that allows the dns subsystem
to remember and handle more then one IP address from response messages.
It basically parses out all IP address and stores them in an array. It
then returns a random
On 21.02.2018 14:39, Steinberg Michael wrote:
seemingly the udp_input code is serving UDP broadcasts originating from a
certain netif to UDP sockets/pcbs bound to the correct port on a different
netif.
I'm not aware of that, could you file a bug until this is sorted out?
Patching udp.c:255
On 20.02.2018 16:35, Giuseppe Modugno wrote:
Another OT.
In order to reduce Flash space for the filesystem used by httpd, I'm
thinking to reduce the size of .html, .css and .js files. This means
removing comments, spaces (when not needed) and maybe changing variable
names (from
On 20.02.2018 11:01, Giuseppe Modugno wrote:
Il 20/02/2018 08:51, goldsi...@gmx.de ha scritto:
On 20.02.2018 08:15, Giuseppe Modugno wrote:
I think this isn't strictly related to lwip, but it's a request typical
on electronic devices where lwip runs, i.e. devices with limited and
restricted
On 19.02.2018 23:18, Jan Menzel wrote:
Hi all!
In our application we wont to allow the user to change the ip address
of the server using a webpage. I wonder what would be the best way of
doing that.
At present we use a very basic webserver that servers a different page
(with HTTP
On 20.02.2018 08:33, Stephan Hilchenbach wrote:
Hello,
this problem was not caused by the LwIP stack, but by the Ethernet driver. It
was solved with the help of the Ti support:
https://e2e.ti.com/support/arm/sitara_arm/f/791/t/663155
The address lookup engine (ALE) processes all received
On 20.02.2018 08:15, Giuseppe Modugno wrote:
I think this isn't strictly related to lwip, but it's a request typical
on electronic devices where lwip runs, i.e. devices with limited and
restricted resources.
It is somewhat related to lwIP as you have to know how to create dynamic
content.
Why don't you use pbuf_cat()? This uses the next pointer of the last
pbuf in a chain.
Simon
On 15.02.2018 18:55, Michael Steinberg wrote:
Hey,
right, it was silly to even ask really ;)
Would I cause considerable harm to the RAM-pool if I allocated the
necessary storage for queueing
On 15.02.2018 16:05, Stephan Hilchenbach wrote:
Hello Experts,
I have a problem with my Ethernet driver connecting a Ti AM335x CPSW
switch to the LwIP stack v1.4.1.
1.4.1 is rather old. There have been numerous bugs fixed since then.
The port stops transmitting after some minutes or
On 12.02.2018 10:57, Mattia Settin wrote:
Dear all
I upgrading my system from lwip 1.4.1 to 2.0.3.
I note that the NETIF_FLAG_DHCP flag was removed.
Unfortunately I can find any note in the change log.
Do you have idea how maintain the flags (i.e. previus compatibily) ?
No, that flag got
On 07.02.2018 17:48, vinay s wrote:
My clone is a week old, I tried enabling MEM_PERF (unix port) and
realized there is no def for mem_perf_init(). Not sure if I saw
something to the effect in wiki either.
Any ideas?
My idea would be that that's orphaned code. There's no such thing as
Are you running over pppos or not? Why did your remove "pppos" from the
2nd mail?
On 01.02.2018 12:49, Kiran wrote:
Hi,
I'm using lwip 2.0.3 with freertos.
I'm running tcp server in my Linux pc and tcp client on atmel
microcontroller with lwip 2.0.3.
I got succeeded in establishing a
On 24.01.2018 18:16, Joel Cunningham wrote:
On 01/24/2018 10:35 AM, Chris Seto wrote:
I have some code which works great, based on the echo client example.
I'm working on hardening it, and I'm wondering with how best to deal
with a dead TCP connection as a result of the network link being
On 18.01.2018 17:46, Chris Seto wrote:
Hi,
I'm using LwIP 2.0 running on an STM32F4 with a TI TLK110 ethernet
PHY. I've written the driver for the PHY and corrected the definitions
within the STM32 HAL such that the PHY is initialized correctly. When
low_level_init() returns, the link is
On 18.01.2018 18:31, Noam Weissman wrote:
Hi Chris,
I am not working with ST HAL, rather with the older SPL (standard
peripheral library).
I do not know why you needed to change the PHY driver as all the
standard PHY’s that are IEEE
compatible will work the same.
Noam, that's simply
On 12.01.2018 13:20, Will Wykeham wrote:
[..]
The possible ways of fixing it that I have come up with are:
(1)
Change the argument in pbuf_alloc where it passes the pointer to
pbuf_init_alloced_pbuf from:
LWIP_MEM_ALIGN((void *)((u8_t *)p + SIZEOF_STRUCT_PBUF + offset))
To:
Jochen Strohbeck wrote:
[..]
For productive system I'm afraid that I have to claim on 1.4.1 for now.
Please be warned again, especially for productive systems: if you have
any focus on security (and for a device with an ethernet connection, you
should), don't use 1.4.1 but use at least 2.0.3
Meera wrote:
I have established communication between tcp client and server via IPv6 , for
that ipv6 ip generated in stm32 board. That is working alright , but the
problem is, IPv6 ip is not there in router's log, ipv4 ip i there. see below
screenshots.
Giuseppe Modugno wrote:
[..] Why the server should close the connection when the Content
Length header is not send?
Because the client cannot reuse this connection to send more requests as
it doesn't know when the server is finished.
HTTP is defined to either get the content length from the
Giuseppe Modugno wrote:
For example, httpd usually calls tcp_output() after http_send(),
except when http_send() is called from http_recv(). From what you
write, it's better to call tcp_output() even in http_recv().
You got that wrong. It's not better. What I meant is it doesn't harm
(other
antonio wrote:
[..]
(*Bellow I provide Wireshark
traces*)
When sharing wireshark traces, please create a pcap that includes only
the necessary excerpt and attach it here.
Wireshark screenshots or packet summary logs don't really help much.
Thanks,
Simon
Giuseppe Modugno wrote:
I'm sorry for the second email.
I noticed in tcp_output():
/**/* First, check if we are invoked by the TCP input processing//
// code. If so, we do not output anything. Instead, we rely on
the//
// input processing code to call us when input
Giuseppe Modugno wrote:
I'm trying to understand the mechanisms under TCP_WRITE_FLAG_MORE,
tcp_write() and tcp_output(). I'm using raw API.
First of all, I couldn't understand if tcp_output() is useful or not.
Why do you think all the world would call tcp_output() if it's not useful?
I
Nikolas Karakotas wrote:
True for not providing enough information.
Deducing wireshark information I can say:
1. Remote host send a Modbus request
2. For whichever reason we don't respond to it as it may have been
lost because of network or Ethernet driver
3. The remote host then re sends the
301 - 400 of 1087 matches
Mail list logo
