Re: impossible rc.d ordering problem with stf and pf ?
Hello, James Long wrote: Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2007 12:02:52 + From: Pete French [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: impossible rc.d ordering problem with stf and pf ? To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1) You use the interface name as address w/o dynamic lookup. i.e. ... from stf0 ... Yes, thats it - I hadn't come across this 'dynamic lookup' thing before though, so I didn't realise what it was. I still cant find it in the PF manual, aside from a reference that you need to do it for NAT. To 1 and 2 there is a simple sollution: Don't do that then! 1 can easily=20 be defused by adding parentheses. i.e. ... from (stf0) pass out on (stf0) inet6 from any to any keep state Just for my edification, what is the point of keep state on an any-to-any rule? imagine that you have only 2 rules - block in on $if all pass out on $if from any to any keep state - with keep state you have internet, without it you do not have ;) Jim ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Best Wishes, Stefan Lambrev ICQ# 24134177 ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Filesystem hang on 3ware 6.2 system
On Wed, Jan 31, 2007 at 02:24:35AM -0500, Michael R. Wayne wrote: We have a nubmer of similar machines that were initiallly formated with 6.2 before it was released and have subsequently been upgraded to 6.2-RELEASE with no issues. So, we upgraded a 6.1 box which has been running fine as long as the nightly dumps do not use -L to take snapshots. Once it was upgraded to 6.2, we enabled -L on the nightly dumps and it hung on the first try. So, I'm suspecting that 6.1 has left SOMEthing on the filesystem which is corrupt. For the moment. we have once again removed -L from the nightly dumps but, other than a complete fsck, is there any other suggested action? 6.2-RELEASE twe0: 3ware Storage Controller. Driver version 1.50.01.002 port 0x9c00-0x9c0f mem 0xfc9ffc00-0xfc9ffc0f,0xfc00-0xfc7f irq 20 at device 1.0 on pci2 twe0: [GIANT-LOCKED] twe0: 2 ports, Firmware FE8S 1.05.00.068, BIOS BE7X 1.08.00.048 See kernel deadlock debugging chapter from the developer handbook for instructions on how to properly report deadlock. pgplDdVYGWaZO.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why does FBSD always assume it's on an 8080 CPU?
Thank you Kris, and all who took the time to respond. Quoting Kris Kennaway [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Fri, Jan 26, 2007 at 08:45:15PM -0800, Chris H. wrote: Hello and thank you for your response... Quoting Mike Jakubik [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Chris H. wrote: CPU: AMD Athlon(tm) XP (1102.51-MHz 686-class CPU) Origin = AuthenticAMD Id = 0x680 Stepping = 0 Features=0x383fbffFPU,VME,DE,PSE,TSC,MSR,PAE,MCE,CX8,APIC,SEP,MTRR,PGE,MCA,CMOV,PAT,PSE36,MMX,FXSR,SSE AMD Features=0xc0400800SYSCALL,MMX+,3DNow+,3DNow That I simply build world/kernel with an clean (empty) make.conf and add the following during port(s) building to attain optimum results given my CPU for this current biuld? CPUTYPE?=pentium4 COPTFLAGS= -march=pentium4 -mmmx -m3dnow -m3dnow+ -msse -msse2 Why are you using pentium4 with an Athlon XP CPU? use athlonxp instead. Also, don't modify the COPTFLAGS. Ooops. I've changed it to: CPUTYPE?=athlon-4 CFLAGS+= -march=athlon-4 -mmmx -m3dnow -m3dnow+ -msse -msse2 Look a little better? :) No, the CFLAGS is still entirely superfluous. Just setting CPUTYPE will DTRT. Kris Yea, I discovered that shortly after my response - the build of Python and Perl barfed using the long CFLAGS+= string. I shortened it to simply: CFLAGS+= -march=athlon-4 Why? You ask? Well, in the past (late 4, and all 5.x) many (most?) builds continued to echo the MNO-CPUFEATURE that the kernel always recognised echoed during boot (All INTEL PIII's). But it appears that MAKE 6 have no trouble with just the CPUTYPE?= , as everything that I've built (some 100+ apps) echo: -march=athlon-4 -march=athlon-4 during the entire build. *Clearly* reinforcing your /brilliant/ and /insightful/ response. :) I LOVE 6! I must admit, I was apprehensive about upgrading any further along than I had. Things got a bit wobbly towards the end of 4 and all through 5 - for me on the 55 some servers I'm running here. But WOW! What a change. Smoothe as silk and MUCH faster. Thank you Kris, and all whom contributed to this WONDERFUL next phase/ version! I got my first copy more years ago than I care to admit. A search for where's ELVI in altavista turned up a copy on a campus server (we all know /which/ campus). No I wasn't a student. But it was just sitting there, and I couldn't resist. I downloaded everything and loaded it - Goodbye M$DOS; the rest was history. I was hooked. I never looked back. :) Thanks again, and to who made this possible. --Chris -- panic: kernel trap (ignored) - FreeBSD 5.4-RELEASE-p12 (SMP - 900x2) Tue Mar 7 19:37:23 PST 2006 / ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
jails and multple interfaces
Hi Folks, I am trying to set a jail hosting server to support multiple jails for development testing. The server has two network interfaces, I am configuring one for host server to use, and the other with several aliased IPs, one for each of the jail servers. All the services running on the host are configured to bind to the host IP on the first interface. The crux is both interfaces on the same network, I am seeing the expected arp errors (e.g. kernel: arp: x.x.x.x is on int0 but got reply on int1), now I know I set the sysctl variable net.link.ether.inet.log_arp_wrong_iface=0 to get rid of these messages, but what I want to know if there are any other problems I am going to have having both interfaces live on the same network. Also even though I have the jail host's services all binding to the first interfaces ip, there is not guarantee that network traffic originating from the jail host will only use its primary interface/IP, is their anyway to ensure that the jail host does not try to talk through the interface being used by the jails? Thanks Jeff ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: jails and multple interfaces
On Wednesday 31 January 2007 11:06, Jeffrey Williams wrote: Hi Folks, I am trying to set a jail hosting server to support multiple jails for development testing. The server has two network interfaces, I am configuring one for host server to use, and the other with several aliased IPs, one for each of the jail servers. All the services running on the host are configured to bind to the host IP on the first interface. The crux is both interfaces on the same network, I am seeing the expected arp errors (e.g. kernel: arp: x.x.x.x is on int0 but got reply on int1), now I know I set the sysctl variable net.link.ether.inet.log_arp_wrong_iface=0 to get rid of these messages, but what I want to know if there are any other problems I am going to have having both interfaces live on the same network. Also even though I have the jail host's services all binding to the first interfaces ip, there is not guarantee that network traffic originating from the jail host will only use its primary interface/IP, is their anyway to ensure that the jail host does not try to talk through the interface being used by the jails? Why are you doing this? Are your addresses from the same network segment? I am binding my jail addresses to loopback interface and route them - this way you could easily start take-over jail on another machine and change routing table (or use dynamic routing) to minimize downtime on hardware upgrades, big OS upgrades etc. I do not consider this the best way, but it just satisfy my needs. Regards, Milan -- This address is used only for mailing list response. Do not send any personal messages to it, use milan in address instead. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: jails and multple interfaces
Milan Obuch wrote: On Wednesday 31 January 2007 11:06, Jeffrey Williams wrote: Hi Folks, I am trying to set a jail hosting server to support multiple jails for development testing. The server has two network interfaces, I am configuring one for host server to use, and the other with several aliased IPs, one for each of the jail servers. All the services running on the host are configured to bind to the host IP on the first interface. The crux is both interfaces on the same network, I am seeing the expected arp errors (e.g. kernel: arp: x.x.x.x is on int0 but got reply on int1), now I know I set the sysctl variable net.link.ether.inet.log_arp_wrong_iface=0 to get rid of these messages, but what I want to know if there are any other problems I am going to have having both interfaces live on the same network. Also even though I have the jail host's services all binding to the first interfaces ip, there is not guarantee that network traffic originating from the jail host will only use its primary interface/IP, is their anyway to ensure that the jail host does not try to talk through the interface being used by the jails? Why are you doing this? Are your addresses from the same network segment? I am binding my jail addresses to loopback interface and route them - this way you could easily start take-over jail on another machine and change routing table (or use dynamic routing) to minimize downtime on hardware upgrades, big OS upgrades etc. I do not consider this the best way, but it just satisfy my needs. Regards, Milan I want to segregate the jail and jail host traffic on separate interfaces. How do you route traffic off you loopback interface? by definition, this interface only allows the network stack to talk to itself? By the way from an IP stand point I believe I am ok, I did a netstat -r on the jail host and only the first interface (jail host) is showing in the routing table, the second interface (jails) is not listed. I just want to make sure duplicate arp tables on the separate interfaces is not going to cause in any weird issues. Thanks Jeff ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: jails and multple interfaces
On Wed, Jan 31, 2007 at 11:19:47AM +0100, Milan Obuch wrote: Why are you doing this? Are your addresses from the same network segment? I am binding my jail addresses to loopback interface and route them - this way Same here. Together with net/quagga on the host, and a smart router talking to it I move my jails between buildings when required, without having to worry about IP addresses. Edwin -- Edwin Groothuis |Personal website: http://www.mavetju.org [EMAIL PROTECTED]| Weblog: http://weblog.barnet.com.au/edwin/ ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: impossible rc.d ordering problem with stf and pf ?
Just for my edification, what is the point of keep state on an any-to-any rule? It's a 'pass out' rule - without the 'keep state' the returning packets wont get back in. -pete. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: jails and multple interfaces
On Wednesday 31 January 2007 11:40, Jeffrey Williams wrote: Milan Obuch wrote: On Wednesday 31 January 2007 11:06, Jeffrey Williams wrote: Hi Folks, I am trying to set a jail hosting server to support multiple jails for development testing. The server has two network interfaces, I am configuring one for host server to use, and the other with several aliased IPs, one for each of the jail servers. All the services running on the host are configured to bind to the host IP on the first interface. ... Why are you doing this? Are your addresses from the same network segment? I am binding my jail addresses to loopback interface and route them - this way you could easily start take-over jail on another machine and change routing table (or use dynamic routing) to minimize downtime on hardware upgrades, big OS upgrades etc. I do not consider this the best way, but it just satisfy my needs. Regards, Milan I want to segregate the jail and jail host traffic on separate interfaces. What do you mean with segregate? Why do you need them going through two physical interfaces? Maybe I just can't see my nose between eyes, but I do not understand the purpose of doing so. How do you route traffic off you loopback interface? by definition, this interface only allows the network stack to talk to itself? There is nothing special there - my physical interface address is from one segment, there is route added on upstream router for loopback bound addresses. It is not true you are able to talk only to itself with loopback address, it is true only for loopback address (127.0.0.1/8). All my tests shows it works the way I want. Actually in jail you see only one IP address on an interfaces, and regardless which one, all traffic from jailed process uses this address as source address. Routing is done in host stack in any case. Regards, Milan -- This address is used only for mailing list response. Do not send any personal messages to it, use milan in address instead. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: jails and multple interfaces
Milan Obuch wrote: On Wednesday 31 January 2007 11:40, Jeffrey Williams wrote: Milan Obuch wrote: On Wednesday 31 January 2007 11:06, Jeffrey Williams wrote: Hi Folks, I am trying to set a jail hosting server to support multiple jails for development testing. The server has two network interfaces, I am configuring one for host server to use, and the other with several aliased IPs, one for each of the jail servers. All the services running on the host are configured to bind to the host IP on the first interface. ... Why are you doing this? Are your addresses from the same network segment? I am binding my jail addresses to loopback interface and route them - this way you could easily start take-over jail on another machine and change routing table (or use dynamic routing) to minimize downtime on hardware upgrades, big OS upgrades etc. I do not consider this the best way, but it just satisfy my needs. Regards, Milan I want to segregate the jail and jail host traffic on separate interfaces. What do you mean with segregate? Why do you need them going through two physical interfaces? Maybe I just can't see my nose between eyes, but I do not understand the purpose of doing so. The server acting as jail host, is also acting as a freebsd build server, a subversion server for the developer source code repositories, and will have a lot of continuous network traffic. The jailed servers are for testing of web applications, which will frequently include network load/bandwidth testing, and network captures. To keep the web app testing clean of the hosting server's network activity I want all the jailed servers to use the second interface, while the hosting server's network traffic stays on the primary interface. And I have this part working, all the jailed servers ip addresses are configured on the second interface, and the hosting server's IP routing table shows that it is only using the primary interface/IP address, for all its IP traffic. My only concern, and what I was hoping to get more information on, is whether there are any potential problems with having two active ethernet interfaces on the same network segment, e.g. arp issues, etc. How do you route traffic off you loopback interface? by definition, this interface only allows the network stack to talk to itself? There is nothing special there - my physical interface address is from one segment, there is route added on upstream router for loopback bound addresses. It is not true you are able to talk only to itself with loopback address, it is true only for loopback address (127.0.0.1/8). All my tests shows it works the way I want. Actually in jail you see only one IP address on an interfaces, and regardless which one, all traffic from jailed process uses this address as source address. Routing is done in host stack in any case. Regards, Milan ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: jails and multple interfaces
Jeffrey Williams wrote: I am trying to set a jail hosting server to support multiple jails for development testing. The server has two network interfaces, I am configuring one for host server to use, and the other with several aliased IPs, one for each of the jail servers. All the services running on the host are configured to bind to the host IP on the first interface. The crux is both interfaces on the same network, I am seeing the expected arp errors (e.g. kernel: arp: x.x.x.x is on int0 but got reply on int1), now I know I set the sysctl variable net.link.ether.inet.log_arp_wrong_iface=0 to get rid of these messages, but what I want to know if there are any other problems I am going to have having both interfaces live on the same network. What exactly are your inetrface configurations and netmasks (ifconfig output might be useful)? You say that both NICs are on teh same network. Does that mean they're connected to teh same switch? That's generally not a good idea. It doesn't buy you anything (unless you use VLAN technology or other additional measures). Also even though I have the jail host's services all binding to the first interfaces ip, there is not guarantee that network traffic originating from the jail host will only use its primary interface/IP, is their anyway to ensure that the jail host does not try to talk through the interface being used by the jails? Any network traffic originating from a jail is guaranteed to use the jail's IP address. The interface that will be used is the one according to your routing table entry for that IP address. (Unless you use things like IPFW FWD or similar to redirect the packets somewhere else.) Best regards Oliver PS: Be very careful when binding services to localhost (127.0.0.1) within the jail. They will listen on the jail's official IP address instead! For that reason I often configure an addition address on lo0 (e.g. 127.0.0.2) and use that one for internal-only traffic such as DNS and mail between host and jails. -- Oliver Fromme, secnetix GmbH Co. KG, Marktplatz 29, 85567 Grafing b. M. Handelsregister: Registergericht Muenchen, HRA 74606, USt-Id: DE204219783 Any opinions expressed in this message are personal to the author and may not necessarily reflect the opinions of secnetix GmbH Co KG in any way. FreeBSD-Dienstleistungen, -Produkte und mehr: http://www.secnetix.de/bsd In My Egoistical Opinion, most people's C programs should be indented six feet downward and covered with dirt. -- Blair P. Houghton ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: jails and multple interfaces
Oliver Fromme wrote: Jeffrey Williams wrote: I am trying to set a jail hosting server to support multiple jails for development testing. The server has two network interfaces, I am configuring one for host server to use, and the other with several aliased IPs, one for each of the jail servers. All the services running on the host are configured to bind to the host IP on the first interface. The crux is both interfaces on the same network, I am seeing the expected arp errors (e.g. kernel: arp: x.x.x.x is on int0 but got reply on int1), now I know I set the sysctl variable net.link.ether.inet.log_arp_wrong_iface=0 to get rid of these messages, but what I want to know if there are any other problems I am going to have having both interfaces live on the same network. What exactly are your inetrface configurations and netmasks (ifconfig output might be useful)? You say that both NICs are on teh same network. Does that mean they're connected to teh same switch? That's generally not a good idea. It doesn't buy you anything (unless you use VLAN technology or other additional measures). Also even though I have the jail host's services all binding to the first interfaces ip, there is not guarantee that network traffic originating from the jail host will only use its primary interface/IP, is their anyway to ensure that the jail host does not try to talk through the interface being used by the jails? Any network traffic originating from a jail is guaranteed to use the jail's IP address. The interface that will be used is the one according to your routing table entry for that IP address. (Unless you use things like IPFW FWD or similar to redirect the packets somewhere else.) Best regards Oliver PS: Be very careful when binding services to localhost (127.0.0.1) within the jail. They will listen on the jail's official IP address instead! For that reason I often configure an addition address on lo0 (e.g. 127.0.0.2) and use that one for internal-only traffic such as DNS and mail between host and jails. Yes, both NIC's are on the same network, connected to the same switch, I not just using the jail's as a sandbox for a couple of services, rather I am using a virtual servers, ideally I would like to have a separate NIC for eash jail, just like I would do if I were setting these up in vmware. It is currently setup and running, at the moment, as near as I can tell I am not having any IP routing issues, all the appropriate configs are below. I don't believe (I could be wrong, definitely tell me if I am) I am going to have and IP issues (i.e. layer 3), what I am concerned about are the potential ethernet issues ARP/RARP (i.e. layer 2). I was getting the expected arp errors, but I did set the net.link.ether.inet.log_arp_wrong_iface to 0, so I am not logging the errors, of course that doesn't mean the errors went away, they just aren't clogging the log files now. What I want to know is, if there are any deleterious effects from having two ethernet interfaces on the same network segment/switch. Frankly I would be very concerned if there wasn't a way to pull this off, while I realize jails were not originally intended to be used as a mechanism to provide virtual servers, it is such an obvious application of the jail functionality, and it is perfectly reasonable to want to have a dedicated NIC for each virtual server, with out having to place each one on a separate network segment. Configurations: rc.conf # Please make all changes to this file, not to /etc/defaults/rc.conf. # This file now contains just the overrides from /etc/defaults/rc.conf. defaultrouter=192.168.10.1 hostname=dev.inside.mydomain.com ifconfig_em0=inet 192.168.10.41 netmask 255.255.255.0 ifconfig_vr0=inet 192.168.10.70 netmask 255.255.255.0 ifconfig_vr0_alias0=192.168.10.71 netmask 255.255.255.0 ifconfig_vr0_alias1=192.168.10.72 netmask 255.255.255.0 ifconfig_vr0_alias2=192.168.10.73 netmask 255.255.255.0 ifconfig_vr0_alias3=192.168.10.74 netmask 255.255.255.0 syslogd_flags=-s -b 192.168.10.41 sendmail_enable=NO moused_enable=YES sshd_enable=YES usbd_enable=YES ntpd_enable=YES rpcbind_enable=NO inetd_flags=-wW -a 192.168.10.41 jail_enable=YES jail_list=test1 test2 test3 test4 test5 jail_set_hostname_allow=NO jail_exec_start=/bin/sh /etc/rc jail_exec_stop=/bin/sh /etc/rc.shutdown jail_devfs_enable=YES jail_test1_rootdir=/jails/test1 jail_test1_hostname=test1.inside.mydomain.com jail_test1_ip=192.168.10.70 jail_test2_rootdir=/jails/test2 jail_test2_hostname=test2.inside.mydomain.com jail_test2_ip=192.168.10.71 jail_test3_rootdir=/jails/test3 jail_test3_hostname=test3.inside.mydomain.com jail_test3_ip=192.168.10.72 jail_test4_rootdir=/jails/test4 jail_test4_hostname=test4.inside.mydomain.com jail_test4_ip=192.168.10.73 jail_test5_rootdir=/jails/test5 jail_test5_hostname=test5.inside.mydomain.com jail_test5_ip=192.168.10.74 #
mpd locking system?
Hello! for about 4-5 days, I'm expeirencing heavy troubles with my VPN (mpd) 6.1-RELEASE based server. After some time (minimum 2 seconds, maximum 12 hours) of running MPD with moderate load (about 100-200 clients, CPU not overused), system locks (even keyboard hangs) to reset. Nothing at all in logs. Patching kernel to 6.1p12 did not help. Attempt to add kern.ipc.nmbclusters=0 to /boot/loader.conf did not change anything. The box seems to be healthy (at least, CPU fan works ok, no symptoms of overheating at all). It has run under more load without a flaw. I hope someone can help. Alex. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
usb hard disk
Dear all! This is not strictly stable, unless I make a mistake and shoot myself in the foot. I have 6.2 amd64 with mobo asus k8n nforce3 250. This box I'd like to use as host for usb hdd, that should contain linux install (debian 4.0, when comes out). Two worlds have not to interfare in any meaning. I hesi- tate to take internal freebsd hdd out of the box. Here's the plan: plug external hdd to usb, change bios option to boot from cd, install debian on sda, change bios option to boot from usb disk. Lilo or grub should be installed on external disk, without writing any data on inter- nal hdd. Is it possible at all? I'm aware that partition table on external hdd could have data for freebsd disk, but nothing has to be writen on internal disk. No boot manager needed, all has to be done using bios. What obstacle would I see doing that? When usb hdd goes away, I want my freebsd system as I have it now. And... I don't like the idea to add hdd inside the box, as slave. I'd like to hear hints, not to have linux mbr on internal (sata) disk, or any adage to it. Best regards Zoran ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
6.2 amd64 panic: lockmgr: thread 0xffffff009f9fd000, not exclusive lock holder 0xffffff003961c000 unlocking
Does this make sense to anyone (it doesn't to me - procfs_doprofile
simply locks, calls vn_fullpath, and unlocks)? I was trying to track
down a hang by running a system under stress, and instead got this panic
as a result of a process running a perl script that looks through
/proc/; it occurred on a very busy system with lots of process churn.
Guy
Unread portion of the kernel message buffer:
panic: lockmgr: thread 0xff009f9fd000, not exclusive lock holder
0xff003961c000 unlocking
cpuid = 0
KDB: stack backtrace:
panic() at panic+0x2ae
lockmgr() at lockmgr+0x7a7
VOP_UNLOCK_APV() at VOP_UNLOCK_APV+0x49
procfs_doprocfile() at procfs_doprocfile+0x83
pfs_readlink() at pfs_readlink+0xda
VOP_READLINK_APV() at VOP_READLINK_APV+0x3d
kern_readlink() at kern_readlink+0x1a0
syscall() at syscall+0x642
Xfast_syscall() at Xfast_syscall+0xa8
--- syscall (58, FreeBSD ELF64, readlink), rip = 0x800bfcf1c, rsp =
0x7fffe8d8, rbp = 0x2 ---
KDB: enter: panic
Dumping 4094 MB (3 chunks)
chunk 0: 1MB (154 pages) ... ok
chunk 1: 3327MB (851552 pages) ... ok
chunk 2: 768MB (196608 pages) ...
#0 doadump () at pcpu.h:172
172pcpu.h: No such file or directory.
in pcpu.h
(kgdb) where
#0 doadump () at pcpu.h:172
#1 0x801994b1 in db_fncall (dummy1=0, dummy2=0, dummy3=0,
dummy4=0x0)
at ../../../ddb/db_command.c:492
#2 0x80199905 in db_command_loop () at
../../../ddb/db_command.c:350
#3 0x8019b82d in db_trap (type=-1238384064, code=0)
at ../../../ddb/db_main.c:222
#4 0x80357f69 in kdb_trap (type=3, code=0, tf=0xb62fc340)
at ../../../kern/subr_kdb.c:473
#5 0x804c9c7c in trap (frame=
{tf_rdi = 0, tf_rsi = -2136928256, tf_rdx = 0, tf_rcx = 1167470,
tf_r8 = 1048064, tf_r9 = 10, tf_rax = 18, tf_rbx = -2141887976, tf_rbp =
-1238383616, tf_r10 = -1238383856, tf_r11 = 4294967274, tf_r12 = 1,
tf_r13 = 256, tf_r14 = -1096833576960, tf_r15 = -1096833576960,
tf_trapno = 3, tf_addr = 0, tf_flags = 1, tf_err = 0, tf_rip =
-2143978945, tf_cs = 8, tf_rflags = 646, tf_rsp = -1238383616, tf_ss =
0}) at ../../../amd64/amd64/trap.c:442
#6 0x804b42fb in calltrap () at
../../../amd64/amd64/exception.S:168
#7 0x80357a3f in kdb_enter (msg=0x0) at cpufunc.h:63
#8 0x80338ae1 in panic (
fmt=0x80556218 lockmgr: thread %p, not %s %p unlocking)
at ../../../kern/kern_shutdown.c:549
#9 0x80328d67 in lockmgr (lkp=0xff00b6159478, flags=6,
interlkp=0x40, td=0xff009f9fd000) at ../../../kern/kern_lock.c:373
#10 0x80514a59 in VOP_UNLOCK_APV (vop=0x806e97c0,
a=0xb62fc590) at vnode_if.c:1692
---Type return to continue, or q return to quit---
#11 0x802e5d53 in procfs_doprocfile (td=0xff009f9fd000,
p=0xff00ad340358, pn=0x0, sb=0xb62fc5e0, uio=0xffe00)
at vnode_if.h:870
#12 0x802eb11a in pfs_readlink (va=0x0) at pcpu.h:169
#13 0x805137cd in VOP_READLINK_APV (vop=0x12, a=0x80a11000)
at vnode_if.c:1481
#14 0x803af7a0 in kern_readlink (td=0xff009f9fd000,
path=0x80a11000 04:59 woodcrest ph[56130]: ...,
pathseg=UIO_USERSPACE,
buf=0x7fffe8e0 Address 0x7fffe8e0 out of bounds,
bufseg=UIO_USERSPACE, count=1023) at vnode_if.h:772
#15 0x804ca5d2 in syscall (frame=
{tf_rdi = 5390024, tf_rsi = 140737488349408, tf_rdx = 1023, tf_rcx
= 0, tf_r8 = -3705797, tf_r9 = 140737488350424, tf_rax = 58, tf_rbx =
8804368, tf_rbp = 2, tf_r10 = 9341008, tf_r11 = 514, tf_r12 = 9144072,
tf_r13 = 140737488349408, tf_r14 = 0, tf_r15 = 0, tf_trapno = 22,
tf_addr = 0, tf_flags = 0, tf_err = 2, tf_rip = 34372308764, tf_cs = 43,
tf_rflags = 514, tf_rsp = 140737488349400, tf_ss = 35}) at
../../../amd64/amd64/trap.c:792
#16 0x804b4498 in Xfast_syscall ()
at ../../../amd64/amd64/exception.S:270
#17 0x000800bfcf1c in ?? ()
Previous frame inner to this frame (corrupt stack?)
(kgdb) frame 11
#11 0x802e5d53 in procfs_doprocfile (td=0xff009f9fd000,
p=0xff00ad340358, pn=0x0, sb=0xb62fc5e0, uio=0xffe00)
at vnode_if.h:870
870vnode_if.h: No such file or directory.
in vnode_if.h
(kgdb) print fullpath
$1 = 0xffefeff2 /usr/bin/file
(kgdb) print *p-p_textvp
$1 = {v_type = VREG, v_tag = 0x8055cd4e ufs,
v_op = 0x806f8d60, v_data = 0xff00b4fb6480,
v_mount = 0xff00123e5948, v_nmntvnodes = {tqe_next =
0xff00b5b169b0,
tqe_prev = 0xff00b45bb408}, v_un = {vu_mount = 0x0, vu_socket =
0x0,
vu_cdev = 0x0, vu_fifoinfo = 0x0}, v_hashlist = {le_next = 0x0,
le_prev = 0xff00b03f19f0}, v_hash = 10339468, v_cache_src = {
lh_first = 0x0}, v_cache_dst = {tqh_first = 0xff00b61afd68,
tqh_last = 0xff00b61afd88}, v_dd = 0x0, v_cstart = 0, v_lasta = 0,
v_lastw = 0, v_clen = 0, v_lock = {lk_interlock = 0x8071d3c0,
lk_flags = 262208, lk_sharecount = 0, lk_waitcount = 0,
lk_exclusivecount = 1, lk_prio = 80,
RE: Dummynet and simulating random delay
From: Luigi Rizzo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 03:03:06PM -0500, Andresen, Jason R. wrote: From: Luigi Rizzo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 06:10:21PM +1100, Peter Jeremy wrote: On Tue, 2007-Jan-23 14:22:54 -0500, Andresen, Jason R. wrote: I have a project that requires me to simulate a link with varying but well defined delay. The link is guarenteed to deliver packets in order, so I wish to maintain that behavior with Dummynet. I don't think dummynet can do this in its current form. Based on actually dummynet never does reordering within a single pipe, even if you change the delay on the fly. But this said, you should explain varying but well defined delay, because if you use TCP or similar as the source, then you have no control on when the userland write-tcp transmission delay anyways so the concept is a bit vague and probably not a meaningful experiment. And even in any common network (from switched ethernet to wireless to dsl...) you have some variance on the delay, ranging from a fraction of a millisecond to much larger values, due to queueing and/or protocol issues (e.g. MAC channel allocation) and/or switch/router/operating system issues. I'm trying to simulate a satellite link that has a normal delay of 1 second, but every 20-30 seconds or so the delay shoots up to 3.5 seconds for about 4 seconds and then settles back down to 1 second. From what you said, I'm thinking that just twiddling the pipe on the fly will probably work. yes but just curious, this is something so odd that i wonder if you couldn't try to reproduce the real reasons for the increase. Is the extra delay due to the device stopping handling stuff for 2.5seconds, then catching up ? if that's the case you might try to change the bandwidth to a very low value for the period while the satellite is asleep, and then back to the normal value. I am not 100% sure but this should work and give a more accurate emulation of what happens, especially the recovery period. That will actually work? Wonderful! Although these links are already low bandwith (2400bps), I guess dropping it down to 10bps or something would work fine. I had thought originally that if I did that it might buffer an entire packet and tag it with a 10 bps speed, causing it to stall the connection for an excessively long period of time. If it just twiddles the output code independent of the queue than it should work perfectly. Thanks. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Dummynet and simulating random delay
On Wed, Jan 31, 2007 at 11:47:48AM -0500, Andresen, Jason R. wrote: From: Luigi Rizzo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ... yes but just curious, this is something so odd that i wonder if you couldn't try to reproduce the real reasons for the increase. Is the extra delay due to the device stopping handling stuff for 2.5seconds, then catching up ? if that's the case you might try to change the bandwidth to a very low value for the period while the satellite is asleep, and then back to the normal value. I am not 100% sure but this should work and give a more accurate emulation of what happens, especially the recovery period. That will actually work? Wonderful! Although these links are already low bandwith (2400bps), I guess dropping it down to 10bps or something would work fine. I had thought originally that if I did that it might buffer an entire packet and tag it with a 10 bps speed, causing it to stall the connection for an excessively long period of time. If it just twiddles you are almost surely right, the deadline for the next packet to send is computed based on its size and the current bw when the packet reaches the head of the queue. So changing the bandwidth simulates a 'stall' of variable length. You would really need a different function to operate on the pipe, something that 'stalls' the pipe for a predetermined amount of time (either inserting the stall at the head of the queue, or at the tail). Implementation is trivial in both cases, but you need to write a bit of code into 'usr/src/sbin/ipfw2.c' to parse the command and issue the setsockopt(), and then into /sys/netinet/ip_dummynet.c to interpret the command. cheers luigi ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: usb hard disk
On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 15:40:13 +0100 Zoran Kolic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is not strictly stable, unless I make a mistake and shoot myself in the foot. I have 6.2 amd64 with mobo asus k8n nforce3 250. This box I'd like to use as host for usb hdd, that should contain linux install (debian 4.0, when comes out). Two worlds have not to interfare in any meaning. I hesi- tate to take internal freebsd hdd out of the box. Here's the plan: plug external hdd to usb, change bios option to boot from cd, install debian on sda, change bios option to boot from usb disk. Lilo or grub should be installed on external disk, without writing any data on inter- nal hdd. Is it possible at all? Yes, as long as the bios of your machine can boot from an usb hard drive, this should be possible. I have done this with several machines. It works like this: (usb hard drive connected to machine) - you boot machine (on some machines you can press a special key to bring up a bios boot menu) - you select usb hard drive from bios boot menu - bios loads boot loader (either Grub, Lilo, FreeBSD boot loader, or whatever boot loader you use) - boot loader from usb hardr drive does its thing (either booting an OS or displaying a boot menu) So far I am only aware of one caveat; the FreeBSD boot loader doesn't work on all machines. For example, I have an Acer Aspire 5672 laptop here were it doesn't work. I am going to try out grub on that laptop to see if it works better, but haven't found the time yet. I'm aware that partition table on external hdd could have data for freebsd disk, but nothing has to be writen on internal disk. No boot No problem, it is the bios which loads from whatever disk you choose. If you make a mistake (for example when installing an OS on the usb hard drive) and suddenly overwrite your inernal hard drive, that's your fault. (If your'e afarid of this happening, simply disconnect the internal drive when installing on the usb hard drive.) manager needed, all has to be done using bios. What obstacle would I see doing that? None, as long as your bios and the boot loader of choice can boot from usb hard drive. HTH -- Regards, Torfinn Ingolfsen, Norway ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
send() returns error even though data is sent, TCP connection still alive
I am on FreeBSD 6.1 and I'm seeing write() return EHOSTDOWN while keeping the connection alive. I wrote a simple C client on the affected FreeBSD box to write a series of integers to a server program on another machine. When the client's write receives an the EHOSTDOWN, the data it sent arrives on the server program anyway. Moreover, when I write() again on the same socket, the data goes through as if nothing ever happened without further errors. The connection is not broken by the EHOSTDOWN, and the client never knows the difference. In fact, if the application just ignores the error from write() everything appears fine after that. The simplest way to see the problem is with SSH. Machine A is a freebsd box, and machine B is another box on the same switch. (1) ssh from A to B (2) see on A that arp -a shows the entry for B (3) on A do arp -d B (4) pull network cable (5) type return to try to send data over the SSH session (of course nothing will happen, the network cable is still out) (6) after the network cable has been unplugged for about 8 seconds, plug it back in (7) type in the SSH session again You should see something like write failed: host is down and the session will terminate. Of course, when ssh exits, the TCP connection closes. The only way to see that it's still open and active is by writing (or using) an application that ignores EHOSTDOWN errors from write(). I think some scripting languages do not generate an exception in that case. This is very strange behavior and it's causing all kinds of problems on our network. Does anyone have an explanation for this? Why would a TCP operation return an error without closing the connection and send the data anyway? This has existed for a long time. I believe this is related to: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=100172 which is related to: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/sys/netinet/if_ether.c? only_with_tag=RELENG_6#rev1.137.2.5 I tried the patch here: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/sys/netinet/if_ether.c? f=h#rev1.158 (rev 1.158) but I can still generate the error I mentioned. Also, what's even more strange is that I set arp to be static on the production machine, and I am still getting EHOSTDOWNs. Regards, Jeff Davis ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: impossible rc.d ordering problem with stf and pf ?
On Wed, Jan 31, 2007 at 09:30:56AM +0200, Stefan Lambrev wrote: Hello, pass out on (stf0) inet6 from any to any keep state Just for my edification, what is the point of keep state on an any-to-any rule? imagine that you have only 2 rules - block in on $if all pass out on $if from any to any keep state - with keep state you have internet, without it you do not have ;) Thank you. I must read more closely. I did not grok the out. Jim ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: buildkernel failure
I saw the same error yesterday building generic on i386. I resync'd the sources(RELENG_6) today and the everything built properly. cr On Tuesday 30 January 2007 1:52 pm, Eli Dart wrote: I just saw the same thing under i386 when building GENERIC. --eli Alban Hertroys wrote: Building a kernel of a freshly updated RELENG_6 source tree reveals the following: === firmware (all) cc -O2 -fno-strict-aliasing -pipe -march=athlon64 -Werror -D_KERNEL -DKLD_MODULE -nostdinc -I- -DHAVE_KERNEL_OPTION_HEADERS -include /build/obj/build/src/sys/BOLTTHROWER/opt_global.h -I. -I@ -I@/contrib/altq -I@/../include -finline-limit=8000 -fno-common -fno-omit-frame-pointer -I/build/obj/build/src/sys/BOLTTHROWER -mcmodel=kernel -mno-red-zone -mfpmath=387 -mno-sse -mno-sse2 -mno-mmx -mno-3dnow -msoft-float -fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables -ffreestanding -Wall -Wredundant-decls -Wnested-externs -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes -Wpointer-arith -Winline -Wcast-qual -fformat-extensions -std=c99 -c /build/src/sys/modules/firmware/../../kern/subr_firmware.c /build/src/sys/modules/firmware/../../kern/subr_firmware.c: In function `firmware_get': /build/src/sys/modules/firmware/../../kern/subr_firmware.c:192: warning: implicit declaration of function `linker_release_module' /build/src/sys/modules/firmware/../../kern/subr_firmware.c:192: warning: nested extern declaration of `linker_release_module' *** Error code 1 Stop in /build/src/sys/modules/firmware. *** Error code 1 Stop in /build/src/sys/modules. *** Error code 1 Stop in /build/obj/build/src/sys/BOLTTHROWER. Exit 1 System is amd64 with a custom kernel. I don't know what might be dependent on subr_firmware, but the error doesn't seem to point to a missing kernel option or device. In the CVS logs I can see that this function was added recently; maybe something was forgotten in the MFC? -- Alban Hertroys Memory expensive?!? My computer has free memory! !DSPAM:74,45bf91649342038170548! ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: send() returns error even though data is sent, TCP connection still alive
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Jeff Davis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You should see something like write failed: host is down and the session will terminate. Of course, when ssh exits, the TCP connection closes. The only way to see that it's still open and active is by writing (or using) an application that ignores EHOSTDOWN errors from write(). I agree that it's a bug. The only time write() on a stream socket should return the asynchronous error[1] is when the connection has been (or is in the process of being) torn down as a result of a subsequent timeout. POSIX says may fail for these errors write() and send() on sockets -GAWollman [1] There are two kinds of error returns in the socket model: synchronous errors, like synchronous signals, are attributed to the result of a specific system call, detected prior to syscall return, and usually represent programming or user error (e.g., attempting to connect() on an fd that is not a socket). Asynchronous errors are detected asynchronously, and merely posted to the socket without being delivered; they may be delivered on the next socket operation. See XSH 2.10.10, Pending Error. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: send() returns error even though data is sent, TCP connection still alive
On Wed, 2007-01-31 at 15:04 -0500, Garrett Wollman wrote: In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Jeff Davis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You should see something like write failed: host is down and the session will terminate. Of course, when ssh exits, the TCP connection closes. The only way to see that it's still open and active is by writing (or using) an application that ignores EHOSTDOWN errors from write(). I agree that it's a bug. The only time write() on a stream socket should return the asynchronous error[1] is when the connection has been (or is in the process of being) torn down as a result of a subsequent timeout. POSIX says may fail for these errors write() and send() on sockets As far as I'm concerned, a fix for this bug is critical. We have had to move production apps off some of our freebsd servers. Regards, Jeff Davis ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
USB stalled errors
Good day (or night, if more appropriate), I'm seeing these for a while now, it's time to see if it can be fixed :P I have a setup where a KVM/USB switch (Gefen 2x1 DVI switcher) is connected to my athlon64 machine, which is connected to yet another hub in my TFT display to which my keyboard and mouse are connected. Schematically the USB devices are connected like this: Athlon64 --- KVM switch --- Display --- Keyboard Mac ---/\-- Mouse While booting I see messages like these: uhub3: vendor 0x04b4 product 0x6560, class 9/0, rev 2.00/0.09, addr 2 uhub3: multiple transaction translators uhub3: 4 ports with 4 removable, self powered uhub4: vendor 0x05ac product 0x9131, class 9/0, rev 2.00/1.01, addr 3 uhub4: multiple transaction translators uhub4: 3 ports with 2 removable, self powered uhub4: device problem (STALLED), disabling port 1 uhub4: device problem (STALLED), disabling port 2 uhub4: device problem (TIMEOUT), disabling port 3 uhub3 is the KVM switch, while uhub4 is the display. The messages are usually STALLED, but I've seen TIMEOUT (as above) and SHORT_XFER as well. I have tried eliminating the hub in the display from the equation, the results are the same (the errors are on uhub3 in that case - although I'm not 100% sure now I write this). I've tried different hub cables (all but one came new with the switch), to no avail. The KVM switch replaced a Sweex USB hub that had very similar problems. Something that I think is odd is that the vendor/product ID's of the hub in the KVM switch are listed among those in the sources, yet looking them up apparently fails. I compiled a kernel with DEBUG_USB enabled and attached the resulting dmesg. I tried retrying usbd_new_device after the first failure, but that just resulted in another STALLED message (as suggested by an XXX remark in uhub.c). Anything else I can do to help solve this? Regards, -- Alban Hertroys If you throw your hands up in the air, how're you gonna catch them?  !DSPAM:74,45c10e909341268575503! ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: USB stalled errors
On Jan 31, 2007, at 22:48, Alban Hertroys wrote: I compiled a kernel with DEBUG_USB enabled and attached the resulting dmesg. I tried retrying usbd_new_device after the first failure, but that just resulted in another STALLED message (as suggested by an XXX remark in uhub.c). Strange, I did attach that file. It is in my sent box even... I wonder where it got lost. Maybe the size? !DSPAM:74,45c110f89345022090619! -- Alban Hertroys If you lose your memory, you can't remember where you left it. !DSPAM:74,45c110f89345022090619! ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: USB stalled errors
On Jan 31, 2007, at 22:59, Alban Hertroys wrote: Strange, I did attach that file. It is in my sent box even... I wonder where it got lost. Maybe the size? Alright... here then: http://solfertje.student.utwente.nl/~dalroi/ dmesg.debug.out I wonder who's stripping my mail. -- Alban Hertroys If you can't see the forest through the trees, cut the trees and you'll see there is no forest !DSPAM:74,45c112f49346141411866! ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Correct way to perform minidumps on gmirror device?
I'm trying to find out the best way to set up minidumps on my gmirror drives. I have some questions about what is considered the correct way of doing this. In particular: 1) The release notes say to sysctl debug.minidump=1, but isn't doing this in /etc/sysctl.conf too late in the process? 2) The examples I've found (http://ezine.daemonnews.org/200608/gmirror_1.html) say to add gmirror configure commands to /etc/rc.early and /etc/rc.local, but the manpage says these are deprecated? Where should these commands be placed? Terry Kennedy http://www.tmk.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] New York, NY USA ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Loader hang
Hi *, I recently installed 6.2 on a Supermicro P8SCT and I found that the loader would hang after a few seconds unless I disabled the Adaptec 29160's BIOS. It also has a 3ware 8006-2LP (which I am booting off). The SCSI card only has a tape drive on it though so I'm surprised it would install a BIOS at all (after probing) Interestingly the hang only occurred when booting the installed version - when booting from the CD it worked perfectly.. Anyone seen anything similar? Any suggestions for debugging? :) -- Daniel O'Connor software and network engineer for Genesis Software - http://www.gsoft.com.au The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of them to choose from. -- Andrew Tanenbaum GPG Fingerprint - 5596 B766 97C0 0E94 4347 295E E593 DC20 7B3F CE8C pgpOff1iMvpzz.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: jails and multple interfaces
Jeffrey Williams wrote: [ ... ] My only concern, and what I was hoping to get more information on, is whether there are any potential problems with having two active ethernet interfaces on the same network segment, e.g. arp issues, etc. The problem you are going to run into is that the default behavior of FreeBSD's routing table will cause it to favor only one of the interfaces if two or more NICs are configured onto the same subnet. You can probably over-ride this behavior for jails by setting up some /32 routes for the jail IPs or use IPFW to fwd certain traffic via specific interfaces. If your switch has port aggregation capabilities (aka port trunking), you could bind them together-- see man ng_fec. Otherwise, the normal approach really is to put the two interfaces on two district subnets. However, if you really want to isolate the traffic due to concern over security, you really ought to consider using two separate machines on two separate switches handling two distinct subnets. -- -Chuck ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
