Re: Question: Status of USAGI/FreeSWAN?
On Thu, May 10, 2001 at 01:28:25AM -0600, Dax Kelson wrote: > > FreeSWAN has IPSec for IPv4 on Linux. > > USAGI is better/more conformant IPv6 (with IPSec for IPv6 in development) > for Linux. > > The USAGI goal is to get themselves folded into the official kernel (and > glibc) at some point "in the near future". > > What are the plans to get all this (FreeSWAN,USAGI) folded into the > kernel. Are the "crypto" legal issues resolved enough now to have crypto > in the official kernel? It would nice to not to have to chase down all > these seperate components and eventually manually patch. > > I'm going a bit crazy keeping track of several different kernel patches > (IPSec,IPv6 in particular) while my *BSD friends just laugh at me. :) > > Dax > You'll probably get more response if you don't reply to an anready existing thread. Just create another message with the exact above and try again without replying... Mike - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: what causes Machine Check exception? revisited (2.2.18)
On Mon, May 07, 2001 at 11:57:17AM +0100, Alan Cox wrote: > Generally it indicates a CPU problem but I've see it caused by overclocking > and poorly fitted heatsinks I've been able to trigger a Machine check error on PPC when trying to boot directly from OF with a COFF kernel. The system has worked perfectly with BootX. I wonder why this is the first non-x86 report... Mike - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: what causes Machine Check exception? revisited (2.2.18)
On Mon, May 07, 2001 at 11:57:17AM +0100, Alan Cox wrote: Generally it indicates a CPU problem but I've see it caused by overclocking and poorly fitted heatsinks I've been able to trigger a Machine check error on PPC when trying to boot directly from OF with a COFF kernel. The system has worked perfectly with BootX. I wonder why this is the first non-x86 report... Mike - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: goodbye
On Sat, Apr 07, 2001 at 11:17:29PM -0500, David Fries wrote: > There is a lot of comfort looking at /var/log/mail.log and seeing mail > accepted by the computer servicing the other person's account. Now > all I have is, accepted by university, hope it gets there... > While I operate my own mail server at home and work, and agree that having logs for the entire transaction is great, I may have a solution for you: Setup your email program to bcc to an address that is also on the internet (bigfoot.com is what I use) and have it forward to your account at the university. That way, when it comes back you'll have a good idea that the other recipient on the internet received the message also. Mike - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: goodbye
On Sat, Apr 07, 2001 at 11:17:29PM -0500, David Fries wrote: There is a lot of comfort looking at /var/log/mail.log and seeing mail accepted by the computer servicing the other person's account. Now all I have is, accepted by university, hope it gets there... While I operate my own mail server at home and work, and agree that having logs for the entire transaction is great, I may have a solution for you: Setup your email program to bcc to an address that is also on the internet (bigfoot.com is what I use) and have it forward to your account at the university. That way, when it comes back you'll have a good idea that the other recipient on the internet received the message also. Mike - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: conducting TCP sessions with non-local IPs
Gregory Maxwell wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 06, 2001 at 12:30:58PM -0800, Bryan Rittmeyer wrote: > > Hello linux-kernel, > > > > Is there any way to conduct TCP sessions (IE have a userland process > > connect out, or accept connections) using non-local IPs? By "non-local" > > I just mean IPs that aren't assigned to an interface, but do fall into > > the network range of a running interface (so netmask, gateway, etc are > > "known"). > > > > For example, I want to bring up an interface for 10.0.0.0/255.255.255.0 > > and assign it IP 10.0.0.1 Then, I want a process to accept TCP > [snip] > > /sbin/ip addr add 10.2.0.0/24 dev eth0 > > Tada How would you deal with the other computer responding to the host "port not reachable"? - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: conducting TCP sessions with non-local IPs
Gregory Maxwell wrote: On Tue, Mar 06, 2001 at 12:30:58PM -0800, Bryan Rittmeyer wrote: Hello linux-kernel, Is there any way to conduct TCP sessions (IE have a userland process connect out, or accept connections) using non-local IPs? By "non-local" I just mean IPs that aren't assigned to an interface, but do fall into the network range of a running interface (so netmask, gateway, etc are "known"). For example, I want to bring up an interface for 10.0.0.0/255.255.255.0 and assign it IP 10.0.0.1 Then, I want a process to accept TCP [snip] /sbin/ip addr add 10.2.0.0/24 dev eth0 Tada How would you deal with the other computer responding to the host "port not reachable"? - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Linux 2.4.3
"Richard B. Johnson" wrote: > > Attempts to run linux-2.4.3-pre2 on chaos.analogic.com results ... > I -- S T R O N G L Y -- suggest that nobody use this kernel with > a BusLogic SCSI controller until this problem is fixed. > > This is being sent from another machine, not on the list (actually > from home where I am trying to see what happened -- I brought all > 4 of my disks home). It looks like some kind of a loop. I have > a pattern written throughout one of the disks. > Have you been able to recover any kernel messages or oops? - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: IDE trouble under 2.2.19pre16 with Hedrick's IDE patch
Shane Wegner wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Whenever I write a substantial amount of data (200mb) to
> disk, I get these messages. The disks lock for about 10
> seconds and then come back for about 10 seconds again.
> This continues until the data is successfully written.
>
> ide_dmaproc: chipset supported ide_dma_timeout func only: 14
> hde: irq timeout: status=0x58 { DriveReady SeekComplete DataRequest }
> hde: DMA disabled
It looks like you have set your drive for a dma mode it doesn't support.
HTH
Mike
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: IDE trouble under 2.2.19pre16 with Hedrick's IDE patch
Shane Wegner wrote:
Hi,
Whenever I write a substantial amount of data (200mb) to
disk, I get these messages. The disks lock for about 10
seconds and then come back for about 10 seconds again.
This continues until the data is successfully written.
ide_dmaproc: chipset supported ide_dma_timeout func only: 14
hde: irq timeout: status=0x58 { DriveReady SeekComplete DataRequest }
hde: DMA disabled
It looks like you have set your drive for a dma mode it doesn't support.
HTH
Mike
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Linux 2.4.3
"Richard B. Johnson" wrote: Attempts to run linux-2.4.3-pre2 on chaos.analogic.com results ... I -- S T R O N G L Y -- suggest that nobody use this kernel with a BusLogic SCSI controller until this problem is fixed. This is being sent from another machine, not on the list (actually from home where I am trying to see what happened -- I brought all 4 of my disks home). It looks like some kind of a loop. I have a pattern written throughout one of the disks. Have you been able to recover any kernel messages or oops? - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Fwd: [LARTC] 1 adsl + 1 sdsl + masq + simultaneous incomming routes]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > On Fri, 2 Mar 2001, Mike Fedyk wrote: > > > I have two dsl links, each with one ip, and a single gateway is assigned the ip > > for each. > > > > ____ > > | ADSL | | SDSL | > > |__| |__| > >\ / > > \/ > > ___|| > > | gateway | > > |_| > > || > > || > > || > >_||__ > > | web | > > |_| > > > > OK. > > > > The problem: I am able to have the web server use one or the other dsl, but not > > both at the same time. > > > > If I have web set to sdsl, replies to queries that came from adsl go out on the > > sdsl link. Also since masq is involved, it also responds with the sdsl ip. > > > > How can I have replies go back on the correct internet link? OH, btw, the web > > server is NT, so I won't be able to modify any packets there... > > What I've done is to put two IPs on the server (your web server, in this > case). You would then have the gateway send one IP out via ADSL, and the > out via SDSL. > > There is no way I know of to make that work. > > -- > --- > Phil Brutsche [EMAIL PROTECTED] There has to be a better way. I'm forwarding this to LKML. Maybe they have a better idea... I know the kernel keeps a route cache, is there something like a reverse MASQ feature somewhere. Storing which incoming route + port number and keeping a dynamic list... TIA, Mike - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Fwd: [LARTC] 1 adsl + 1 sdsl + masq + simultaneous incomming routes]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, 2 Mar 2001, Mike Fedyk wrote: I have two dsl links, each with one ip, and a single gateway is assigned the ip for each. ____ | ADSL | | SDSL | |__| |__| \ / \/ ___|| | gateway | |_| || || || _||__ | web | |_| OK. The problem: I am able to have the web server use one or the other dsl, but not both at the same time. If I have web set to sdsl, replies to queries that came from adsl go out on the sdsl link. Also since masq is involved, it also responds with the sdsl ip. How can I have replies go back on the correct internet link? OH, btw, the web server is NT, so I won't be able to modify any packets there... What I've done is to put two IPs on the server (your web server, in this case). You would then have the gateway send one IP out via ADSL, and the out via SDSL. There is no way I know of to make that work. -- --- Phil Brutsche [EMAIL PROTECTED] There has to be a better way. I'm forwarding this to LKML. Maybe they have a better idea... I know the kernel keeps a route cache, is there something like a reverse MASQ feature somewhere. Storing which incoming route + port number and keeping a dynamic list... TIA, Mike - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Linux 2.0.x Questions
Gabi Davar wrote: > > Hello I have two questions regarding Linux 2.0.x > > 1. Did anybody tried running Linux 2.0.x on the Intel i840 chipset based > boards? > > 2. Does anybody knows of a 2.0.x driver for Intel's 82543GC Gigabit Ethernet > MAC (aka e1000) ? > > Thanks in advance, > > Best regards, > Gabi Davar What are your reasons with staying on the 2.0 kernel series? You probably won't find very many 2.0 users here anymore. Did you contact the 2.0 maintainer? - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Via UDMA5 3/4/5 is not functional!
Catalin BOIE wrote: > i got in syslog the message: "ide0: Speed warnings UDMA 3/4/5 is not > functional"! > > What is the problem? > > Thanks in advance! > Wasn't dma disabled on all VIA ide chipsets because of sporadic corruption? - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Via UDMA5 3/4/5 is not functional!
Catalin BOIE wrote: i got in syslog the message: "ide0: Speed warnings UDMA 3/4/5 is not functional"! What is the problem? Thanks in advance! Wasn't dma disabled on all VIA ide chipsets because of sporadic corruption? - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Linux 2.0.x Questions
Gabi Davar wrote: Hello I have two questions regarding Linux 2.0.x 1. Did anybody tried running Linux 2.0.x on the Intel i840 chipset based boards? 2. Does anybody knows of a 2.0.x driver for Intel's 82543GC Gigabit Ethernet MAC (aka e1000) ? Thanks in advance, Best regards, Gabi Davar What are your reasons with staying on the 2.0 kernel series? You probably won't find very many 2.0 users here anymore. Did you contact the 2.0 maintainer? - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
"PCI quirks" in kernel for ppc in 2.2
Does this help for ppc? The help talks about BIOS which I know is only on x86. Does this code include anything that helps a non x86 comp? Mike - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
PCI quirks in kernel for ppc in 2.2
Does this help for ppc? The help talks about BIOS which I know is only on x86. Does this code include anything that helps a non x86 comp? Mike - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
