Re: Is if_ipsec/ipsec - AESNI accelerated ?

2018-08-08 Thread Andrey V. Elsukov
On 09.08.2018 06:57, David P. Discher wrote: > I’m suspecting that IPSec in FreeBSD is not leveraging AESNI on Intel. Is > this correct ? IPsec uses crypto(9) framework that works by default without any acceleration. You need to load aesni(4) kernel module to enable acceleration. Also, you need

[Bug 228108] if_ipsec drops all the icmp v4 error messages

2018-08-08 Thread bugzilla-noreply
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=228108 --- Comment #10 from Andrey V. Elsukov --- (In reply to dpd from comment #9) > This change breaks ICMP ECHO (pings) to the receiving end of peer to peer > /30 of the IPsec tunnel between FreeBSD and Juniper JunOS on their SRX > products.

Re: Is if_ipsec/ipsec - AESNI accelerated ?

2018-08-08 Thread Eugene Grosbein
09.08.2018 10:57, David P. Discher wrote: > I’m suspecting that IPSec in FreeBSD is not leveraging AESNI on Intel. Is > this correct ? > > A small system, with an Atom C2758 and AESNI can hit 940-950 Mbps on a 1g > copper link SCPing a file with Chiper=aes256-gcm. SSH/OpenSSL automatically

Is if_ipsec/ipsec - AESNI accelerated ?

2018-08-08 Thread David P. Discher
I’m suspecting that IPSec in FreeBSD is not leveraging AESNI on Intel. Is this correct ? A small system, with an Atom C2758 and AESNI can hit 940-950 Mbps on a 1g copper link SCPing a file with Chiper=aes256-gcm. SSH/OpenSSL automatically uses AESNI if available. (Side Note, loading

[Bug 230465] ixl: not working in netmap mode

2018-08-08 Thread bugzilla-noreply
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=230465 Mark Linimon changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||IntelNetworking

[Bug 230465] ixl: not working in netmap mode

2018-08-08 Thread bugzilla-noreply
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=230465 Michael changed: What|Removed |Added CC||m.mu...@spam-fetish.org --- Comment #1

route6d terminated with signal 11, Segmentation fault, Was: Bug in route6d?

2018-08-08 Thread John Hay
Hi, I have logged it as a bug with a possible patch: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=229807 Regards John On 8 July 2018 at 09:46, John Hay wrote: > Hi All, > > I have a small ntp server (PC Engines APU), with an ipv6 subnet on lo0 > with route6d to advertise it. A few

[Bug 229384] Can't remove address from carp

2018-08-08 Thread bugzilla-noreply
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=229384 --- Comment #11 from Kajetan Staszkiewicz --- The fix is mentioned in my message dated 2018-08-03 15:36:02 UTC. Please stop fixating on the fact that I have patched kernel and start reading my messages *thoroughly* instead. The issue

[Bug 230465] ixl: not working in netmap mode

2018-08-08 Thread bugzilla-noreply
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=230465 Charles Goncalves changed: What|Removed |Added CC||n...@freebsd.org -- You are

natd sends wrong sequence number when a retransmitted PASV packet comes in

2018-08-08 Thread Andreas Longwitz
On a firewall machine I use FreeBSD 10.4-STABLE #0 r331239. I run ipfw/natd as a security guard for my production FTP server. That works fine for many years. But now one of my customers runs his ftp clients in a not very stable environment, so sometimes a few packets are lost. Thats ok and TCP

[Bug 225927] [panic] NULL pointer dereference in nd6_llinfo_timer()

2018-08-08 Thread bugzilla-noreply
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225927 --- Comment #12 from commit-h...@freebsd.org --- A commit references this bug: Author: ae Date: Wed Aug 8 16:09:29 UTC 2018 New revision: 337460 URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/337460 Log: MFC r336405: Move invoking

[Bug 209682] [panic] [netinet] arptimer race

2018-08-08 Thread bugzilla-noreply
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=209682 --- Comment #16 from commit-h...@freebsd.org --- A commit references this bug: Author: ae Date: Wed Aug 8 16:09:29 UTC 2018 New revision: 337460 URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/337460 Log: MFC r336405: Move invoking

[Bug 228802] [aarch64] network throughput regression in 12.0-CURRENT

2018-08-08 Thread bugzilla-noreply
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=228802 --- Comment #25 from h...@restart.be --- I try with 12.0-CURRENT r336112 and patch from https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=229644 The throughput regression is still there -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on

[Bug 229384] Can't remove address from carp

2018-08-08 Thread bugzilla-noreply
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=229384 --- Comment #10 from Vinícius Zavam --- (In reply to Kajetan Staszkiewicz from comment #9) good that you really took it personal (although that was not the intention). the idea was/is to have the closest scenario to reproduce any panic