Re: ssl accelerator cards and jail?

2009-07-24 Thread Brian A. Seklecki
On Wed, 2009-07-08 at 16:45 -0400, Michael Scheidell wrote: has anyone done any work with hardware ssl accelerator cards and freebsd? I'm pretty sure. Because it is a;; one kernel, the userland-kernel sysctls just fall through to the host. I've been meaning to try the VMWare ESXi 4.0 PCI

Re: ssl accelerator cards and jail?

2009-07-24 Thread Brian A. Seklecki
On Fri, 2009-07-24 at 12:11 -0400, Michael Scheidell wrote: thanks. maybe I'll look into one of those and give it a try on 7.1 (worries me that 7.2 has a shorted lifespan than 7.1...) That's by design per the releng document. Hey, my ESXi 4.0 machine is PCI-Express only. My Broadcom cards

bind()/sendto() behavior in RELENG_7

2009-05-08 Thread Brian A. Seklecki
All: Did the behavior of bind()/sendto() functions WRT jails change in proximity to the RELENG_7_2 branch? I just spent 1.5 days chasing, what I thought was a bug in Courier-MTA's IPv6 socket selection code within Jails, to realize a paradox of a configuration scenario: My ESTMP client

Re: anyone using ssl accellorator cards in jail?

2009-04-06 Thread Brian A. Seklecki
On Tue, 2009-03-31 at 07:38 -0700, Michael Scheidell wrote: trying to speed things up. I suspect that syscalls that support acceleration will simply fall right through the jail into the host kernel. I'll be testing that some time next week -- so I'll let you know. I don't think file handle

Re: HEADS UP: r185435 multi-IPv4/v6/no-IP jails in HEAD

2008-12-05 Thread Brian A. Seklecki
On Tue, 2008-12-02 at 21:00 -0500, alexus wrote: as far as I understood HEAD is 8.0-CURRENT The trick is to bribe the right people to get it RFP'd into 7.2R. :) ~BAS -- Brian A. Seklecki [EMAIL PROTECTED] Collaborative Fusion, Inc. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed

Re: HEADS UP: r185435 multi-IPv4/v6/no-IP jails in HEAD

2008-12-05 Thread Brian A. Seklecki
On Fri, 2008-12-05 at 20:47 +0100, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote: The question is, does it change existing behavior, or just add new functionality? The syntax semantics should be backward compatible, so likely the latter. -- Brian A. Seklecki [EMAIL PROTECTED] Collaborative Fusion, Inc

Re: Multiple IPS - Freebsd 7.1

2008-10-02 Thread Brian A. Seklecki
that FAST_IPSEC NAT-T patch for FreeBSD), I'm just glad that this wont involve / require a full pullup of Julian Elischer's Vimage and FIB+Multi-Routing-Table changes. Chances of those making way into 7.x are low like Skylab. -- Brian A. Seklecki [EMAIL PROTECTED] Collaborative Fusion, Inc