Victor Sudakov wrote:
> Andrey V. Elsukov wrote:
> >
> > Seems your ifconfig(8) is a bit out of day.
>
> My ifconfig(8) is from 11.2-RELEASE.
> > My manual says:
> > autoconf
> > Set the IPv6 autoconfigured address bit.
> >
> > -autoconf
> > Clear the IPv6
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=220217
Kristof Provost changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|New
20.10.2018 6:03, Lev Serebryakov wrote:
> Please note, that I'm testing endpoint, not a router, so netmap-based
> packet generators & receivers is no use for me, unfortunately.
Try benchmarks/wrk. It works pretty well for speeds lower than 40Gbit/s
but its version 4.0.2 had its
Hello Eugene,
Saturday, October 20, 2018, 12:18:01 AM, you wrote:
Please note, that I'm testing endpoint, not a router, so netmap-based
packet generators & receivers is no use for me, unfortunately.
>>> Try benchmarks/wrk. It works pretty well for speeds lower than 40Gbit/s
>>> but
In message <308e30cf-95a2-4ff0-b02c-3b2bca2cb...@lists.zabbadoz.net>,
"Bjoern A. Zeeb" wrote:
>On 19 Oct 2018, at 3:32, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
>
>> Just curious Are any of the wireless adaptors listed here:
>>
>> https://www.freebsd.org/releases/12.0R/hardware.html#support
>>
>>
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=231169
Eric Joyner changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||e...@freebsd.org
--- Comment #6
20.10.2018 3:50, Lev Serebryakov wrote:
>>> Please note, that I'm testing endpoint, not a router, so netmap-based
>>> packet generators & receivers is no use for me, unfortunately.
>> Try benchmarks/wrk. It works pretty well for speeds lower than 40Gbit/s
>> but its version 4.0.2 had its own
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=194515
Kristof Provost changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|Open|Closed
CC|
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=165488
Kristof Provost changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|Open|Closed
CC|
Hello Eugene,
Friday, October 19, 2018, 10:45:50 PM, you wrote:
>> Please note, that I'm testing endpoint, not a router, so netmap-based
>> packet generators & receivers is no use for me, unfortunately.
> Try benchmarks/wrk. It works pretty well for speeds lower than 40Gbit/s
> but its version
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=231169
--- Comment #5 from Compri ---
(In reply to Eugene Grosbein from comment #4)
I use static addresses only
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
20.10.2018 2:27, Lev Serebryakov wrk:
>
> I need to benchmark different endpoint (not router) network performance
> with different encapsulations (if_gre, if_gif) and with/without IPsec
> (including if_ipsec).
>
> What is suitable traffic generator/receiver for me?
>
> I'm trying to use
> On 19. Oct 2018, at 21:27, Lev Serebryakov wrote:
>
>
> I need to benchmark different endpoint (not router) network performance
> with different encapsulations (if_gre, if_gif) and with/without IPsec
> (including if_ipsec).
>
> What is suitable traffic generator/receiver for me?
>
> I'm
I need to benchmark different endpoint (not router) network performance
with different encapsulations (if_gre, if_gif) and with/without IPsec
(including if_ipsec).
What is suitable traffic generator/receiver for me?
I'm trying to use benchmarks/iperf3, but it consumes questionable
amount of
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=231166
Eugene Grosbein changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||eu...@freebsd.org
--- Comment
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=231169
Eugene Grosbein changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||eu...@freebsd.org
--- Comment
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=232451
Lev A. Serebryakov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|b...@freebsd.org|n...@freebsd.org
--
You are
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=231166
--- Comment #4 from steven_nik...@ertyu.org ---
Tried a different 82574 card I had and the behaviour was the same.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
Andrey V. Elsukov wrote:
> >>>
> >>> BTW do you know the diffrence between the "accept_rtadv" and
> >>> "autoconf" flags in ifconfig?
> >>
> >> The accept_rtadv is interface's attribute and it is shown in the "nd6
> >> options" line, but the autoconf is address's attribute.
> >
> > ifconfig(8)
On 19.10.2018 15:41, Victor Sudakov wrote:
> Andrey V. Elsukov wrote:
>>>
>>> BTW do you know the diffrence between the "accept_rtadv" and
>>> "autoconf" flags in ifconfig?
>>
>> The accept_rtadv is interface's attribute and it is shown in the "nd6
>> options" line, but the autoconf is address's
Andrey V. Elsukov wrote:
> >
> > BTW do you know the diffrence between the "accept_rtadv" and
> > "autoconf" flags in ifconfig?
>
> The accept_rtadv is interface's attribute and it is shown in the "nd6
> options" line, but the autoconf is address's attribute.
ifconfig(8) says that
On 19.10.2018 12:35, Victor Sudakov wrote:
> Andrey V. Elsukov wrote:
>> On 18.10.2018 18:56, Victor Sudakov wrote:
>>> Thank you Andrey, you made my day! I'm beginning to love IPv6 more and
>>> more.
>>>
>>> How would the prefer_source flag look like in rc.conf? Is the following
>>> approach
Andrey V. Elsukov wrote:
> On 18.10.2018 18:56, Victor Sudakov wrote:
> > Thank you Andrey, you made my day! I'm beginning to love IPv6 more and
> > more.
> >
> > How would the prefer_source flag look like in rc.conf? Is the following
> > approach correct:
> >
> > ifconfig_fxp0_ipv6="inet6
On 18.10.2018 18:56, Victor Sudakov wrote:
> Thank you Andrey, you made my day! I'm beginning to love IPv6 more and
> more.
>
> How would the prefer_source flag look like in rc.conf? Is the following
> approach correct:
>
> ifconfig_fxp0_ipv6="inet6 accept_rtadv"
> ifconfig_fxp0_alias0="inet6
On 19 Oct 2018, at 3:32, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
Just curious Are any of the wireless adaptors listed here:
https://www.freebsd.org/releases/12.0R/hardware.html#support
capable of doing 802.11ac?
Adaptors are; FreeBSD drivers not yet. There is ongoing work to
improve the
25 matches
Mail list logo
