Re: rTorrent + FreeBSD + pf = freeze?
Hello, This problem has been going on for at least the past 2 years. I've had the exact same issue with rtorrent locking up or restarting machines running FreeBSD, regardless of the hardware used. I did not have any sort of firewall installed (neither pf, or ipfw). If I loaded up rtorrent and had a number of torrents open the machines would lock up or restart. It was reproducible at the time, but I could never get anyone to admit there was a bug and I'm unable to find the initial posting. Regards, -Peter Michael Schaefer wrote: Hello everybody, I encountered same problems and am kinda glad to see I'm not alone. I use FreeBSD 7.1-RELEASE-p8 (GENERIC) on a VIA EPIA board (800MHz C3). This box for the moment does nothing but torrent. I use two instances of rtorrent. Each with an own user and in its own screen session. Let's name them A and B. A seeds around 300 torrents and B around 500 (each rtorrent instance communicates just to one specific tracker). The configuration is exactly the same, except B communicates with the track only using https (A does plain http). While A works 100% perfect an stable, B crashes the machine reproducible. When using rtorrent 0.8.3/0.12.3 this happened only about once a month. After upgrading to 0.8.4/0.12.4 the rate of crashes increased to about once a week. now i upgraded to 0.8.5/0.12.5 and cannot even start instance B without crashing the machine immediately just several minutes after I started it. Sometimes it somehow survives the starting procedure (where actually all seeding torrents are registered at the tracker at more or less the same time) but then it takes about 10min - 2 hours after the hole systems crashes again. Like I mentioned: instance B works perfectly without any problems. I'm pretty sure I encountered the problem also (even not the heavily) during times instance B was only seeding about 300 torrents... For me the system simply reboots and doesn't freeze. The logs are clear and show no advice concerning the problem. It's not a matter of hardware since I changed the board (which included CPU, RAM, NIC,...) and also the hard disc month ago. Also a heat problem can be excluded. Any clou about all that? btw: I don't use PF at all... regards - Michael On Wed, 21 Oct 2009, cpghost wrote: Hi, could a resource leak or bug in pf(4) crash a RELENG_7 router (as of Oct 6th)? I'm experiencing frequent crashes on my soekris net4801 home router for some months now, and I'm wondering if it could be some kind of pf-related bug similar to this on OpenBSD: http://www.mail-archive.com/m...@openbsd.org/msg58042.html More precisely, when I fire up rtorrent-devel on some *other* machine (not the router!), everything runs fine at first. It could also run very fine for many days. BUT should I start a torrent with a large number of seeders which could saturate my link for an extended period of time, the soekris router would suddenly freeze... but not immediately: more like a few hours (3 to 6) or so of relatively heavy traffic. Only a hard reboot of the router would help. Please note that rtorrent is NOT running on the router, only its traffic is being redirected through the router. So I'm suspecting some bug / resource leak in pf that would bring the kernel down somehow. What kind of resources should I monitor (and how)? Maybe that could bring some clues? Oh, before anybody asks: I have no crashdumps, the router freezes totally without panicking. And it doesn't recover automatically even after many hours. Any ideas? Thanks, -cpghost. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
ipfw keep-state + IPv6 on FreeBSD 7
Hello, I'm having problems with ipfw + IPv6 keep-state rules, if I use a keep-state rule on IPv6 it will only work intermittently (eg. I can connect to an FTP site with IPv6 and start to grab a file, but it will stall after a few seconds). I am using deny all by default on ipfw, my ruleset is as follows (em0 is my external interface): add check-state add allow all from any to any via lo0 add allow all from any to any out via em0 keep-state The keep-state works fine for IPv4 traffic, but IPv6 traffic connectivity will only work intermittently with the above ruleset. I am running a RELENG_7 cvsuped/built on Tue Oct 16: FreeBSD akuma.pfak.org 7.0-PRERELEASE FreeBSD 7.0-PRERELEASE #1: Tue Oct 16 18:30:20 PDT 2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/AKUMA i386 Any hints? Is IPv6 + keep-state broken on 7.0? Thank you, -Peter ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ipfw keep-state + IPv6 on FreeBSD 7
Hello, I'm having problems with ipfw + IPv6 keep-state rules, if I use a keep-state rule on IPv6 it will only work intermittently (eg. I can connect to an FTP site with IPv6 and start to grab a file, but it will stall after a few seconds). I am using deny all by default on ipfw, my ruleset is as follows (em0 is my external interface): add check-state add allow all from any to any via lo0 add allow all from any to any out via em0 keep-state The keep-state works fine for IPv4 traffic, but IPv6 traffic connectivity will only work intermittently with the above ruleset. I am running a RELENG_7 cvsuped/built on Tue Oct 16: FreeBSD akuma.pfak.org 7.0-PRERELEASE FreeBSD 7.0-PRERELEASE #1: Tue Oct 16 18:30:20 PDT 2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/AKUMA i386 Any hints? Is IPv6 + keep-state broken on 7.0? Thank you, -Peter ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
FreeBSD multi-homed w/ipnat
Hello, I am unable to get ipnat working in a multi homed FreeBSD system. Is there some special method that works? because I've yet to find it. What I am attempting to do is: I have 2 Internet Connections (one is DSL and the other is cable), they are dc0 and dc1 respectively. I also have an interface facing my local LAN. I have two segments on my LAN, one is 192.168.1.0/24, and the other is 192.168.2.0/24 - What I am attempting to do is have the DSL line (dc0) to be used for one segment, and the cable (dc1) for the other segment. I am *not* attempting to load balance. My current ifconfig produces the following: dc0: flags=108843UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST mtu 1500 options=8VLAN_MTU inet6 fe80::250:bfff:fead:886%dc0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x1 inet 64.180.103.x netmask 0xfc00 broadcast 64.180.103.255 ether 00:50:bf:ad:08:86 media: Ethernet autoselect (10baseT/UTP) status: active dc1: flags=108843UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST mtu 1500 options=8VLAN_MTU inet6 fe80::250:bfff:fead:884%dc1 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x2 inet 70.68.27.x netmask 0xfc00 broadcast 255.255.255.255 ether 00:50:bf:ad:08:84 media: Ethernet autoselect (100baseTX full-duplex) status: active vr0: flags=8843UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST mtu 1500 inet 192.168.1.1 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 192.168.1.255 inet6 fe80::211:d8ff:fe3d:564a%vr0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x3 ether 00:11:d8:3d:56:4a media: Ethernet autoselect (100baseTX full-duplex) status: active lo0: flags=8049UP,LOOPBACK,RUNNING,MULTICAST mtu 16384 inet 127.0.0.1 netmask 0xff00 inet6 ::1 prefixlen 128 inet6 fe80::1%lo0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x4 The gateway for dc1 is 70.68.24.1, the gateway for dc0 is 64.180.100.254, I have managed to get both IP addresses working on the machine by adding the following ipf rule: pass out quick on dc0 to dc1:70.68.24.1 from 70.68.27.x to any pass out quick on dc1 to dc0:64.180.100.254 from 64.180.103.x to any This makes sure that the packet is forwarded to the correct interface based on the source IP address, however when I enabled these rules my NAT *fails* forward packets to the internet, my ipnat configuration is as follows: map dc0 192.168.1.0/24 - 0/32 map dc1 192.168.2.0/24 - 0/32 Am I missing something here? --Peter ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD multi-homed w/ipnat
Dick Hoogendijk wrote: On 18 Feb Peter Kieser wrote: vr0: flags=8843UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST mtu 1500 inet 192.168.1.1 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 192.168.1.255 inet6 fe80::211:d8ff:fe3d:564a%vr0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x3 ether 00:11:d8:3d:56:4a media: Ethernet autoselect (100baseTX full-duplex) status: active map dc0 192.168.1.0/24 - 0/32 map dc1 192.168.2.0/24 - 0/32 I only seee 192.168.1.1 defined. Is this a typo or is there inof missing? The map with the CIDR prefix only specifies what IP addresses the NAT will masquerade for, still doesn't explain why 192.168.1.0/24 masquarde fails to work. You can specify the subnet mask for 192.168.1.1 as 255.255.254.0 to cover both those blocks, which is a 192.168.0.0/23. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
