On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, James wrote:
Does anybody know of any IPv6 traffic generators, to stress test v6
routers? No need for setting hop by hop options, 6to4 tunneling, etc
options. just plain unicast v6 packet generator.
Web Polygraph[1] supports IPv6 addresses[2].
Polygraph is designed to test
On Thu, 18 Jul 2002, Chuck T. wrote:
Yes portablity is a concern, unfortunately my program will
probably be used on Linux more than FreeBSD, sigh. I starting to
read about ioctl() and SIOCGIFADDR which appears to be portable
(and a pain).
We had to write portable local address detection
On Tue, 2 Jul 2002, John Angelmo wrote:
I was thinking of cunstructing a small routerbox in my sparetime.
Now since FreeBSD is my choise of OS i was thinking of a small box
silent box.
So how can I combine speed, size, silence and price?
I was thinking of vias small buget systems (via
Ivo,
Looks like your question is specific to Squid rather than FreeBSD.
Please see Squid FAQ at www.squid-cache.org and ACL-related comments
in the default squid.conf file. The info you need is there. If you
need further help, please post to squid-users mailing list, after
searching its
and contemplating its effect on the rest of our
setup.
Thank you,
Alex.
On Fri, 5 Apr 2002, Alex Rousskov wrote:
Hi there,
I have two Ethernet NICs inside a PC. I want TCP/IP packets to
leave one NIC, go on the wire, and eventually arrive at the other NIC.
I do not want the kernel to be smart
On Sat, 6 Apr 2002, Nick Rogness wrote:
I had a brief thought of using an upstream device that could route
the appropriate nat'd addresses to each interface.
This is not an option, unfortunately. The required functionality has
to be implemented inside one PC (appliance). No
Hi there,
I have two Ethernet NICs inside a PC. I want TCP/IP packets to
leave one NIC, go on the wire, and eventually arrive at the other NIC.
I do not want the kernel to be smart and shortcut the path. I want the
outside world to see the packets and to think that my two NICs are two
On Mon, 14 Jan 2002, Terry Lambert wrote:
This is getting way off topic, but here is a business case
illustration.
Are you perhaps doing what the Q/A people at a previous job were
doing, and stress-testing the crap out of a machine on a Gigabit
LAN, at or near wire speeds, when in the
On Fri, 30 Nov 2001, Jonathan Lemon wrote:
On Fri, Nov 30, 2001 at 09:01:21AM -0600, mark tinguely wrote:
Too bad there are not companies throwing money around to fund a good
rewrite...of course there is some competative advatange to do so only
for themselves.
Anyone want to fund a
.
Alex.
On Tue, 9 Oct 2001, Alex Rousskov wrote:
Are you running out of ephemeral ports? See net.inet.ip.portrange
sysctl or do your own port management.
Alex.
On Tue, 9 Oct 2001, Nguyen-Tuong Long Le wrote:
Hi all,
I have a software that simulates web clients and servers
Are you running out of ephemeral ports? See net.inet.ip.portrange
sysctl or do your own port management.
Alex.
On Tue, 9 Oct 2001, Nguyen-Tuong Long Le wrote:
Hi all,
I have a software that simulates web clients and servers to create
network congestion (for the purpose of doing research
On Wed, 30 May 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The following program binds *:1000 to a socket, and then tries to
bind 200.47.36.254:1000 to another socket, the error i gets is
Address already in use. Why?
*:1000 includes 200.47.36.254:1000 by definition of bind(2). Binding
two sockets to one
On Mon, 26 Mar 2001, Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino wrote:
what are you planning to do after checking IPv6 support in the kernel?
applications should be written so that it would work on both
IPv4-only, IPv6-only and IPv4/v6 dual stack kernels, by using
getaddrinfo(3) and
On Wed, 7 Mar 2001, Andy [TECC NOPS] wrote:
Just built a new kernel with
options IPFIREWALL
options IPDIVERT
and all went in ok. However, when I
user the ipfw command to add a rule
(or when rc.firewall does) I get the
following error message:-
ipfw: getsocketopt(IP_FW_ADD):
On Wed, 28 Feb 2001, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
if you do care about this, you may want to restructure the data structure
used to store/match interface addresses. At the moment it is a linear list,
so the matching of incoming packets is probably Very Time Comsuming!
We have a patch (posted to this
On Wed, 28 Feb 2001, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
the source of confusion is just the fact that when you ifconfig an
interface, you really give two distinct pieces of information:
1. an ip address that the machine recognises as its own
2. an address for a subnet connected to that interface.
With
On Wed, 28 Feb 2001, Tobias Fredriksson wrote:
No you will be able to bind normaly to a.b.c.1, but i have had the
problems where if i specify anything to bind a.b.c.2 and it has bound on
all ip's aliased on the computer.
Tobias,
I know that I can bind to any (and all) of the 1000+
17 matches
Mail list logo
