Re: Will this card (probably) work?

[Lee Brown]

Maybe I'm looking in the wrong place, but I cannot find anything
single-mode from Intel except the X520-LR1 (82599ES chipset) which is only
a single port.
Everything else is Multi-mode.  Even a lot of the SFP stuff only supports
MM.
At least that's where my research leads me.  If you have any insight I'd
gladly follow.
Believe me, if I could find a supported vendor 4-port or even 2-port SFP or
LC that supported SMF I'd be going after it rabidly :)
Maybe I should just go with a fiber switch and offload to copper, then at
least if there are problems it sites firmly with the vendor and not me!

-- lee

On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 12:50 PM, Jack Vogel  wrote:

> I think I should let Intel speak to this, they do have quad port adapters
> in their offerings, and
> as far as I know they are fine. I was speaking of times past when the
> bridge device would be
> the source of problems, and just saying if this was a non-Intel design it
> could be an issue, but
> since you are being brave don't let me ruin your adventure :)
>
> Jack
>
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 12:32 PM, Lee Brown  wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 12:24 PM, Jack Vogel  wrote:
>>
>>> Its not that they, whoever they is :). "use" the Intel PCID, no, it
>>> really IS the Intel device,
>>> but it's silicon, not an assembled adapter, its that part which is being
>>> done by someone
>>> else, and btw, the components to support 4 port type adapters have been
>>> notoriously
>>> problematic in the past, so having it done by someone besides Intel is
>>> at least a potential
>>> source of concern.
>>>
>>> Do you know if 2-port adapters are generally more reliable?  I could
>> revise my server purchase so I can stuff a couple of cards in there,
>> instead of one.
>>
>>
>>
>>> I wish you the best,
>>>
>> Thanks :)
>>
>
>
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

FreeBSD 11.0 / netmap-fwd / ngeth0 / vrrp / vif

[Outback Dingo]

Hi, curious, Ive tried netmapfwd with ngeth0 / vrrp and it doesnt seem
to be passing packets through to the VIF. basically its a pair of
redundent BGP routers. Does ngeth and VRRP work with netmap-fwd ? or
am i going to need to look at using openvswitch ? Thanks
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

[Bug 213015] openvswitch and vnet jails - panic when bridge is destroyed and recreated

[bugzilla-noreply]

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=213015

--- Comment #4 from Bjoern A. Zeeb  ---
(In reply to akoshibe from comment #2)

When in your shell script does the panic happen?  Do you know?   I wonder if
it's before the ifconfig commands.

In general I wonder if the OVS buffers packets and does a deferred transmit,
e.g. like the netisr;  in that case on del one would have to cleanup the queue.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

[Bug 213015] openvswitch and vnet jails - panic when bridge is destroyed and recreated

[bugzilla-noreply]

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=213015

Bjoern A. Zeeb  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||b...@freebsd.org

--- Comment #3 from Bjoern A. Zeeb  ---
(In reply to Palle Girgensohn from comment #1)

That forums thread is quite old;  things should have improved for 11.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

[Bug 213015] openvswitch and vnet jails - panic when bridge is destroyed and recreated

[bugzilla-noreply]

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=213015

--- Comment #5 from akosh...@gmail.com ---
(In reply to Bjoern A. Zeeb from comment #4)

I'm suspecting that the panic occurs when I create the bridge for the second
time. I'm going to try to check if that's the case later today.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

[Bug 212283] oversized IP datagrams on raw socket with IP_RAWOUTPUT hang network interface drivers

[bugzilla-noreply]

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=212283

--- Comment #15 from Mathieu Arnold  ---
This is still a problem on 11.0-RELEASE.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

[Bug 213015] openvswitch and vnet jails - panic when bridge is destroyed and recreated

[bugzilla-noreply]

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=213015

--- Comment #2 from akosh...@gmail.com ---
(In reply to Palle Girgensohn from comment #1)

I've noticed that I won't trigger a panic if, keeping everything else the same,
I omit sending traffic (e.g. the one ping in the test script) or replace
openvswitch with if_bridge. Hence, I'm also wondering if it's something about
what openvswitch does with its tap interface.

If there is a solid way to do jails with networking and netgraph, that is
something that I would like to take a look at, and would appreciate pointers
for...

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

[Bug 213015] openvswitch and vnet jails - panic when bridge is destroyed and recreated

[bugzilla-noreply]

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=213015

--- Comment #6 from Palle Girgensohn  ---
(In reply to Bjoern A. Zeeb from comment #3)

Mmm, indeed it is. But I haven't seen that much action about epair lately, has
it really been improved enough? The described problem is identical with what we
experienced back then.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: Will this card (probably) work?

[Jack Vogel]

Its not that they, whoever they is :). "use" the Intel PCID, no, it really
IS the Intel device,
but it's silicon, not an assembled adapter, its that part which is being
done by someone
else, and btw, the components to support 4 port type adapters have been
notoriously
problematic in the past, so having it done by someone besides Intel is at
least a potential
source of concern.

I wish you the best,

Jack


On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 9:02 AM, Lee Brown  wrote:

>
>
> On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 4:44 PM, Jack Vogel  wrote:
>
>> Yes, "should be", but just remember now, if this adapter does not look
>> like a
>> genuine Intel made part (and from some comment from either Jeff or Eric
>> it
>> sounded like it wasn't), then IF you have a problem you are going to get
>> no
>> support from them.  Of course, in most worlds you'd have no problem, but
>> there's
>> always some possible one in which you know :)
>>
>> Just being the voice of caution here...
>>
>> Jack
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 4:10 PM, Sean Bruno  wrote:
>>
>>> >
>>> > OK the vendor got back to me:
>>> >
>>> > 8086:1522
>>>
>>> That appears to be governed by the the igb(4) driver.  You should be
>>> good to go.
>>>
>>> fbsd_head/sys/dev/e1000 % grep -r E1000_DEV_ID_I350_FIBER *
>>> e1000_api.c:case E1000_DEV_ID_I350_FIBER:
>>> e1000_hw.h:#define E1000_DEV_ID_I350_FIBER  0x1522
>>> if_igb.c:   {IGB_INTEL_VENDOR_ID, E1000_DEV_ID_I350_FIBER,  0, 0, 0},
>>>
>>> sean
>>>
>>>
>> Much appreciated both of you.  For $168 I'm willing to risk it.
> I assume they use Intel's PCID instead of their own because they use the
> Intel driver (which is encouraging).  However Intel make nothing like this
> card (maybe they used to), so yes, it is a foray into the unknown.
> If I'm unable to get it working or working well, at least I have
> alternatives (meda converters at the far end and SFP into an existing fiber
> switch).
> And if I do, well we've got one more card to add to the compatibility list.
> -- lee
>
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: Will this card (probably) work?

[Lee Brown]

On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 4:44 PM, Jack Vogel  wrote:

> Yes, "should be", but just remember now, if this adapter does not look
> like a
> genuine Intel made part (and from some comment from either Jeff or Eric it
> sounded like it wasn't), then IF you have a problem you are going to get no
> support from them.  Of course, in most worlds you'd have no problem, but
> there's
> always some possible one in which you know :)
>
> Just being the voice of caution here...
>
> Jack
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 4:10 PM, Sean Bruno  wrote:
>
>> >
>> > OK the vendor got back to me:
>> >
>> > 8086:1522
>>
>> That appears to be governed by the the igb(4) driver.  You should be
>> good to go.
>>
>> fbsd_head/sys/dev/e1000 % grep -r E1000_DEV_ID_I350_FIBER *
>> e1000_api.c:case E1000_DEV_ID_I350_FIBER:
>> e1000_hw.h:#define E1000_DEV_ID_I350_FIBER  0x1522
>> if_igb.c:   {IGB_INTEL_VENDOR_ID, E1000_DEV_ID_I350_FIBER,  0, 0, 0},
>>
>> sean
>>
>>
> Much appreciated both of you.  For $168 I'm willing to risk it.
I assume they use Intel's PCID instead of their own because they use the
Intel driver (which is encouraging).  However Intel make nothing like this
card (maybe they used to), so yes, it is a foray into the unknown.
If I'm unable to get it working or working well, at least I have
alternatives (meda converters at the far end and SFP into an existing fiber
switch).
And if I do, well we've got one more card to add to the compatibility list.
-- lee
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: Will this card (probably) work?

[Lee Brown]

On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 12:24 PM, Jack Vogel  wrote:

> Its not that they, whoever they is :). "use" the Intel PCID, no, it really
> IS the Intel device,
> but it's silicon, not an assembled adapter, its that part which is being
> done by someone
> else, and btw, the components to support 4 port type adapters have been
> notoriously
> problematic in the past, so having it done by someone besides Intel is at
> least a potential
> source of concern.
>
> Do you know if 2-port adapters are generally more reliable?  I could
revise my server purchase so I can stuff a couple of cards in there,
instead of one.



> I wish you the best,
>
Thanks :)
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: Will this card (probably) work?

[Jack Vogel]

I think I should let Intel speak to this, they do have quad port adapters
in their offerings, and
as far as I know they are fine. I was speaking of times past when the
bridge device would be
the source of problems, and just saying if this was a non-Intel design it
could be an issue, but
since you are being brave don't let me ruin your adventure :)

Jack



On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 12:32 PM, Lee Brown  wrote:

>
>
> On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 12:24 PM, Jack Vogel  wrote:
>
>> Its not that they, whoever they is :). "use" the Intel PCID, no, it
>> really IS the Intel device,
>> but it's silicon, not an assembled adapter, its that part which is being
>> done by someone
>> else, and btw, the components to support 4 port type adapters have been
>> notoriously
>> problematic in the past, so having it done by someone besides Intel is at
>> least a potential
>> source of concern.
>>
>> Do you know if 2-port adapters are generally more reliable?  I could
> revise my server purchase so I can stuff a couple of cards in there,
> instead of one.
>
>
>
>> I wish you the best,
>>
> Thanks :)
>
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

[Bug 213015] openvswitch and vnet jails - panic when bridge is destroyed and recreated

[bugzilla-noreply]

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=213015

Mark Linimon  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Assignee|freebsd-b...@freebsd.org|freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org
 CC|freebsd-am...@freebsd.org   |

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

[Bug 213015] openvswitch and vnet jails - panic when bridge is destroyed and recreated

[bugzilla-noreply]

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=213015

Palle Girgensohn  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||gir...@freebsd.org

--- Comment #1 from Palle Girgensohn  ---
I've hade exaclty the same problems with epair, switched to netgraph instead
which has proven rock solid.

I know there is a project to improve this area as well, can't remember frmo the
top of my head who is working on it. Don't think it has hit the source tree yet
though.

For epair problems, see for example this thread:
https://forums.freebsd.org/threads/31765/

If all you want is networking running in jails, I can document the procedure we
use, using netgraph (not epoair). This is very solid.

Epair+vimage has alsway had this problem when tearing down the jail, sadly.

Palle

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"