On Tuesday 03 March 2009 10:33:55 Leslie Jensen wrote:
I'm considering a Squid box serving two different networks, both with
their own Internet access.
Access from network 1 to default router on network 1
and
Access from network 2 to default router on network 2
How do one set default
correctly at a previous location. Over here it
works, but have no need for it anymore, since a FreeBSD wireless router is
doing it's job.
There are many advantages of using a full-blown computer for (wireless)
routing/nat/firewall, most notably the diagnostics that are available.
Our FreeBSD
Roger Olofsson wrote:
Corey Chandler skrev:
Nerius Landys wrote:
Thank you all for your suggestions. This will be a project for me
over the holidays. I decided to go the standalone wireless router
approach.
Good man!
I will need to figure out how to configure my standalone
wireless
Mel wrote:
On Monday 22 December 2008 14:48:52 Corey Chandler wrote:
Failing that, the
Linksys WRT54GL isn't a half bad unit.
Yes it is a half bad unit.
Absolutely-- if you're running out of the box firmware. I use DD-WRT or
Tomato specifically to get around the issues you
to
VxWorks.
Probably because they realised they could get away with less memory and
a slower CPU because code runs more efficiently on VxWorks vs. Linux
on the same hardware. Of course it also provides fewer features than
Linux, so I'd prefer a Linux-based router over VxWorks.
--
Bruce Cran
Corey Chandler skrev:
Roger Olofsson wrote:
Corey Chandler skrev:
Nerius Landys wrote:
Thank you all for your suggestions. This will be a project for me
over the holidays. I decided to go the standalone wireless router
approach.
Good man!
I will need to figure out how to configure
On Saturday 27 December 2008 16:49:54 Roger Olofsson wrote:
Corey Chandler skrev:
Roger Olofsson wrote:
Corey Chandler skrev:
Nerius Landys wrote:
Thank you all for your suggestions. This will be a project for me
over the holidays. I decided to go the standalone wireless router
On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 04:31:56PM -0800, Nerius Landys wrote:
Thank you all for your suggestions. This will be a project for me
over the holidays. I decided to go the standalone wireless router
approach.
That's probably the easiest way.
I already have. Also I don't know too much about
Nerius Landys skrev:
Thank you all for your suggestions. This will be a project for me
over the holidays. I decided to go the standalone wireless router
approach. I will need to figure out how to configure my standalone
wireless router to pass everything through to the internal LAN that
I
Corey Chandler skrev:
Nerius Landys wrote:
Thank you all for your suggestions. This will be a project for me
over the holidays. I decided to go the standalone wireless router
approach.
Good man!
I will need to figure out how to configure my standalone
wireless router to pass everything
I have a PC with FreeBSD set up as a router (NAT). The PC has several
network cards and I'm grouping the internal-facing network cards as a
bridge (promiscuous mode for the interfaces). Everything works well.
Now I'd like to extend my wired network to include wireless. I really
have
On Monday 22 December 2008 18:49:44 Nerius Landys wrote:
I have a PC with FreeBSD set up as a router (NAT). The PC has several
network cards and I'm grouping the internal-facing network cards as a
bridge (promiscuous mode for the interfaces). Everything works well.
Now I'd like to extend my
On Monday 22 December 2008 19:05:32 Mario Lobo wrote:
On Monday 22 December 2008 18:49:44 Nerius Landys wrote:
I have a PC with FreeBSD set up as a router (NAT). The PC has several
network cards and I'm grouping the internal-facing network cards as a
bridge (promiscuous mode
Nerius Landys wrote:
I have a PC with FreeBSD set up as a router (NAT). The PC has several
network cards and I'm grouping the internal-facing network cards as a
bridge (promiscuous mode for the interfaces). Everything works well.
Now I'd like to extend my wired network to include wireless
On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 01:49:44PM -0800, Nerius Landys wrote:
I have a PC with FreeBSD set up as a router (NAT). The PC has several
network cards and I'm grouping the internal-facing network cards as a
bridge (promiscuous mode for the interfaces). Everything works well.
Now I'd like
Nerius Landys skrev:
I have a PC with FreeBSD set up as a router (NAT). The PC has several
network cards and I'm grouping the internal-facing network cards as a
bridge (promiscuous mode for the interfaces). Everything works well.
Now I'd like to extend my wired network to include wireless
On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 1:49 PM, Nerius Landys nlan...@gmail.com wrote:
snip
So in a nutshell, I have a wired FreeBSD router with multiple ethernet
jacks at home, and I want to extend it to include wireless network.
Any suggestions would be appreciated. Thanks.
If you have another PCI slot
Roger Olofsson wrote:
Nerius Landys skrev:
I have a PC with FreeBSD set up as a router (NAT). The PC has several
network cards and I'm grouping the internal-facing network cards as a
bridge (promiscuous mode for the interfaces). Everything works well.
Now I'd like to extend my wired network
Thank you all for your suggestions. This will be a project for me
over the holidays. I decided to go the standalone wireless router
approach. I will need to figure out how to configure my standalone
wireless router to pass everything through to the internal LAN that
I already have. Also I
Nerius Landys wrote:
Thank you all for your suggestions. This will be a project for me
over the holidays. I decided to go the standalone wireless router
approach.
Good man!
I will need to figure out how to configure my standalone
wireless router to pass everything through to the internal
Hello Jeremy:
On 10/6/08 9:30 PM, Jeremy Chadwick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Oct 06, 2008 at 06:08:50PM -0700, Michael K. Smith - Adhost wrote:
Hello All:
We have a load balanced pair of PF boxes sitting in front of a whole bunch of
server doing all manner of things! It's been
G'Day all,
Got a network that has 2 DSL connections.
The 1st has cheap data and the 2nd is a more reliable provider.
Basically all data goes out the first provider except some IPs which
will use the second provider (just a ipfw fwd rule).
If the cheap one goes offline data has to route out via
Hello All:
We have a load balanced pair of PF boxes sitting in front of a whole bunch of
server doing all manner of things! It's been working great up until today when
it, well, didn't. Here's what I see in top -S.
PID USERNAME THR PRI NICE SIZERES STATE C TIME WCPU
On Mon, Oct 06, 2008 at 06:08:50PM -0700, Michael K. Smith - Adhost wrote:
Hello All:
We have a load balanced pair of PF boxes sitting in front of a whole bunch of
server doing all manner of things! It's been working great up until today
when it, well, didn't. Here's what I see in top
On Sun, Sep 14, 2008 at 7:46 PM, Chris Telting [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
I'm searching ports for a web management router application for a firewall.
Something generic that is similar to what we all find on SOHO routers. I'm
searching the ports tree and other resources now. Not sure what
Does anyone know how I can mount an airport express disk connected via
USB to my airport express router ? I believe the disk can be
advertised on the LAN with the bonjour service - if that helps any.
thanks in advance.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
express router ? I believe the disk can be
advertised on the LAN with the bonjour service - if that helps any.
thanks in advance.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send
know how I can mount an airport express disk connected via
USB to my airport express router ? I believe the disk can be
advertised on the LAN with the bonjour service - if that helps any.
thanks in advance.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing
Svein Halvor Halvorsen wrote:
An alternative to the inserted text in all http traffic (and
probably easier to implement) is just to divert all unknown traffic
to an internal ip-adress (using the firewall), and setup a web page
on that address. Then have people click some button, which will
: Saturday, August 09, 2008 3:34 PM
To: Svein Halvor Halvorsen
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Free wireless network (access point, router, transparent HTTP
proxy setup)
On Sat, 09 Aug 2008 13:54:04 +0200, Svein Halvor Halvorsen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello, fellow FreeBSD-ers!
I'd like
Hello, fellow FreeBSD-ers!
I'd like to a good neighbor and share my DSL line and set up an
unencrypted free wireless access point. I often find myself wanting
more free access points around the city, so I thought I'd stand up
as a good example for others :-)
I want people to know that they can
On Sat, 09 Aug 2008 13:54:04 +0200, Svein Halvor Halvorsen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Hello, fellow FreeBSD-ers!
I'd like to a good neighbor and share my DSL line and set up an
unencrypted free wireless access point. I often find myself wanting
more free access points around the city, so I
Halvor Halvorsen
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Free wireless network (access point, router, transparent HTTP
proxy setup)
On Sat, 09 Aug 2008 13:54:04 +0200, Svein Halvor Halvorsen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello, fellow FreeBSD-ers!
I'd like to a good neighbor and share my DSL line and set up
Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
This sounds like too much work for a doubtful amount of gain. It
is probably a lot easier to use ipfw or pf+altq to rate limit
the bandwidth others can use :)
Marcel Grandemange wrote:
Sounds To Me Also too much work for little gain...
The learning experience in
El día Saturday, August 09, 2008 a las 04:33:37PM +0300, Giorgos Keramidas
escribió:
On Sat, 09 Aug 2008 13:54:04 +0200, Svein Halvor Halvorsen [EMAIL
PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello, fellow FreeBSD-ers!
I'd like to a good neighbor and share my DSL line and set up an
unencrypted free wireless
Matthias Apitz wrote:
To the OP: Be aware that depending on the local laws you might (will) be
responsible if the NATed IP is used in criminal affairs (downloads,
child porno, etc.); at least the local authorities will ask you who used
that IP and take your complete system with them for
PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Giorgos Keramidas
Sent: Saturday, August 09, 2008 3:34 PM
To: Svein Halvor Halvorsen
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Free wireless network (access point, router, transparent HTTP
proxy setup)
On Sat, 09 Aug 2008 13:54:04 +0200, Svein Halvor Halvorsen
[EMAIL PROTECTED
On Wednesday 16 July 2008 09:13:00 pm Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 20:20:59 -0400, Steven Friedrich [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
My laptop connects just fine, until I config the router to turn off
broadcasting SSID. Then, ifconfig reports no carrier.
Is there a config
On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 06:28:42 -0400, Steven Friedrich [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wednesday 16 July 2008 09:13:00 pm Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
Note: The man page for wpa_supplicant.conf incorrectly states ap_scan
values other than 1 are for other operating systems. Read
On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 16:44:41 +0300, Giorgos Keramidas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 06:28:42 -0400, Steven Friedrich [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Wednesday 16 July 2008 09:13:00 pm Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
Note: The man page for wpa_supplicant.conf incorrectly states ap_scan
On Thursday 17 July 2008 09:57:26 am Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 16:44:41 +0300, Giorgos Keramidas
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 06:28:42 -0400, Steven Friedrich
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wednesday 16 July 2008 09:13:00 pm Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
Note:
My laptop connects just fine, until I config the router to turn off
broadcasting SSID. Then, ifconfig reports no carrier.
Is there a config setting I need?
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 20:20:59 -0400, Steven Friedrich [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My laptop connects just fine, until I config the router to turn off
broadcasting SSID. Then, ifconfig reports no carrier.
Is there a config setting I need?
Hi Steven,
How are you bringing up the wireless interface
Hello,
I am using freebsd7 on a thinkpad T23 laptop and the ipw driver for
the intel 2100 mini-pci card. The 7.0 ipw driver works vs. not working
in 6.x . My network consists of an AP+WPA-router+DHCP+DNS-DSL modem.
I have setup wpa_supplicant correctly and everything works. An issue
arises where
On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 1:20 PM, David Gurvich
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
I am using freebsd7 on a thinkpad T23 laptop and the ipw driver for
the intel 2100 mini-pci card. The 7.0 ipw driver works vs. not working
in 6.x . My network consists of an AP+WPA-router+DHCP+DNS-DSL modem.
I
small but expensive. used 486-pentium hardware is for free.
486 hardware with three NICs, a CF drive, and run off of a few watts of DC
power tend not to free.
that's the adventage. but edimax 6104K router with 5 ethernets running
netbsd is both cheaper smaller and faster with it's 175Mhz
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
Does anyone know of anyone make an enterprise level router based off of FreeBSD?
In all seriousness, if you want to roll your own based on FreeBSD, I
have a couple of these units that I've been testing internally with that
run FreeBSD off of a thumb drive
Steve Bertrand wrote:
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
Does anyone know of anyone make an enterprise level router based off
of FreeBSD?
In all seriousness, if you want to roll your own based on FreeBSD, I
have a couple of these units that I've been testing internally with that
run FreeBSD off
On May 29, 2008, at 1:36 AM, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
that's the adventage. but edimax 6104K router with 5 ethernets
running netbsd is both cheaper smaller and faster with it's 175Mhz 2
instr/cycle MIPS CPU. 16MB RAM+2MB flash isn't much but enough to fit.
I will keep that in mind the next
with Cisco ...
- --On Wednesday, May 28, 2008 09:55:07 +0200 Wojciech Puchar
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Does anyone know of anyone make an enterprise level router based off of
FreeBSD?
define what enterprise level router is
- --
Marc G. FournierHub.Org Hosting Solutions S.A. (http
Does anyone know of anyone make an enterprise level router based off of FreeBSD?
define what enterprise level router is
- --
Marc G. FournierHub.Org Hosting Solutions S.A. (http://www.hub.org)
Email . [EMAIL PROTECTED] MSN . [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Yahoo
Wojciech Puchar wrote:
Does anyone know of anyone make an enterprise level router based off
of FreeBSD?
define what enterprise level router is
Something that doesn't say 'Vista capable' on the box?
:)
Steve
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
FreeBSD?
define what enterprise level router is
Something that doesn't say 'Vista capable' on the box?
so get 486, 16MB RAM, needed amount of network cards, install FreeBSD and
configure :)
(pentium may be needed for full 100Mb/s capability
Bob McConnell writes:
define what enterprise level router is
Something that doesn't say 'Vista capable' on the box?
so get 486, 16MB RAM, needed amount of network cards, install FreeBSD
and
configure :)
(pentium may be needed for full 100Mb/s capability)
Finding
From: Robert Huff
Bob McConnell writes:
define what enterprise level router is
Something that doesn't say 'Vista capable' on the box?
so get 486, 16MB RAM, needed amount of network cards, install
FreeBSD
and
configure :)
(pentium may be needed for full 100Mb/s
On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 09:51:35AM -0400, Bob McConnell wrote:
From: Robert Huff
Bob McConnell writes:
define what enterprise level router is
Something that doesn't say 'Vista capable' on the box?
so get 486, 16MB RAM, needed amount of network cards, install
FreeBSD
Wojciech Puchar
define what enterprise level router is
Something that doesn't say 'Vista capable' on the box?
so get 486, 16MB RAM, needed amount of network cards, install FreeBSD
and
configure :)
(pentium may be needed for full 100Mb/s capability)
Finding a box with that enough PCI
one does not need to
waste
one slot on a graphics card.)
And all this just to *pass packets*; if you're making real *routing*
decisions based upon that (i.e. you're making a router rather than a
switch), which requires that packets take a trip to the CPU, you'll
find yourself coming
might add.) It also has built-in graphics so one does not need to waste
one slot on a graphics card.)
And all this just to *pass packets*; if you're making real *routing*
decisions based upon that (i.e. you're making a router rather than a
switch), which requires that packets take a trip
one slot on a graphics card.)
And all this just to *pass packets*; if you're making real *routing*
decisions based upon that (i.e. you're making a router rather than a
switch), which requires that packets take a trip to the CPU, you'll
find yourself coming to the realization that Cisco
On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 10:48 AM, Erik Trulsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 10:31:24AM -0400, Jerry B. Altzman wrote:
And all this just to *pass packets*; if you're making real *routing*
decisions based upon that (i.e. you're making a router rather than a
switch), which
Bob McConnell wrote:
I don't need that many Ethernet ports, but I do need most of those PCI
slots. I was unable to locate a box with more than four slots and a
warranty that was acceptable to our Production group. I'm still not sure
about the warranty or that we can buy it in a case with power
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Giorgos
Keramidas
Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2008 7:38 PM
To: Matthew Donovan
Cc: Marc G. Fournier; freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: FreeBSD based router ...
On Tue, 27 May 2008 22:28:35
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Jerry B.
Altzman
Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2008 7:31 AM
To: Erik Trulsson
Cc: Bob McConnell; freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: FreeBSD based router ...
On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 10:08 AM
(pentium may be needed for full 100Mb/s capability)
Finding a box with that enough PCI slots might be problematic.
not true. 5 PCI slots isn't uncommon+ISA slots. ISA slot is OK for video
card (easy to find in scraps ;).
___
Finding a box with that enough PCI slots might be problematic.
Six slots X quad-port network cards = 24 interfaces.
If you need more than that, it's probably worth investing in
specialized hard-/software.
Robert Huff
Where did you find a
And all this just to *pass packets*; if you're making real *routing*
decisions based upon that (i.e. you're making a router rather than a
switch), which requires that packets take a trip to the CPU, you'll
packet headers
find yourself coming to the realization that Cisco and Juniper might
These guys have a 2 or 4 port nic for $100:
http://www.soekris.com/lan16x1.htm
Try Ebay for the Adaptec ANA-6944-TX. It's a 4 port based on the old DEC
chipset (de driver) Usual can be had for = $10.
but prepare for problems connecting this with other devices. usually works
well with
They are very expensive.
A Juniper is not based on FreeBSD. It uses FreeBSD as the
control interface. The actual routing happens in specialized
ASICS that Juniper custom-builds.
good for multiple gigabits traffic or more. for lower speed - not worth
of.
On May 28, 2008, at 11:06 AM, Rob wrote:
These guys have a 2 or 4 port nic for $100:
http://www.soekris.com/lan16x1.htm
For small and medium sized enterprises that really just need firewall,
NAT, static routing and are fine with 100Mb ether on the router, I've
been happy with using
For small and medium sized enterprises that really just need firewall, NAT,
static routing and are fine with 100Mb ether on the router, I've been happy
with using soekris net48XX boxes using m0n0wall
http://m0n0.ch/wall/
or pfsense
http://www.pfsense.com/
both FreeBSD based.
small
Jeffrey Goldberg wrote:
On May 28, 2008, at 11:06 AM, Rob wrote:
These guys have a 2 or 4 port nic for $100:
http://www.soekris.com/lan16x1.htm
For small and medium sized enterprises that really just need firewall,
NAT, static routing and are fine with 100Mb ether on the router, I've
been
Wojciech Puchar wrote:
been happy with using soekris net48XX boxes using m0n0wall
small but expensive. used 486-pentium hardware is for free.
No it's not, they consume electricity. Soekris boxes are designed for
low-power. I had a 4501 and now have a 5501.
On May 28, 2008, at 3:08 PM, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
For small and medium sized enterprises that really just need
firewall, NAT, static routing and are fine with 100Mb ether on the
router, I've been happy with using soekris net48XX boxes using
m0n0wall
small but expensive. used 486
Tom Van Looy wrote:
Wojciech Puchar wrote:
been happy with using soekris net48XX boxes using m0n0wall
small but expensive. used 486-pentium hardware is for free.
No it's not, they consume electricity. Soekris boxes are designed for
low-power. I had a 4501 and now have a 5501.
And, other
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Jon Radel
Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2008 5:24 PM
To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: FreeBSD based router ...
Tom Van Looy wrote:
Wojciech Puchar wrote:
been happy with using
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Does anyone know of anyone make an enterprise level router based off of FreeBSD?
- --
Marc G. FournierHub.Org Hosting Solutions S.A. (http://www.hub.org)
Email . [EMAIL PROTECTED] MSN . [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Yahoo
On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 10:56:55PM -0300, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Does anyone know of anyone make an enterprise level router based off of
FreeBSD?
- --
Marc G. FournierHub.Org Hosting Solutions S.A. (http://www.hub.org)
Email
That would be Juniper
On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 9:28 AM, Matthew Donovan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 10:56:55PM -0300, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Does anyone know of anyone make an enterprise level router based off
On Tue, 27 May 2008 22:28:35 -0400, Matthew Donovan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 10:56:55PM -0300, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
Does anyone know of anyone make an enterprise level router based off of
FreeBSD?
Juniptor makes routers based on freebsd. Sorry for the spelling
On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 6:56 PM, Marc G. Fournier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Does anyone know of anyone make an enterprise level router based off of
FreeBSD?
- --
Marc G. FournierHub.Org Hosting Solutions S.A. (http://www.hub.org
My feeling is that's something in my router that BSD doesn't like and
Linux doesn't care
(since it works).
Instead of posting my custom kernel config, I decided that I will give
it another two radical tries:
- first, I'll compile a generic kernel
- second, if the first attempt is unsuccessful, I
192.168.1.1 and traceroute 192.168.1.1 give Network is unreachable
I even connected directly to the cable modem as it was before I bought the
router and... surprise: it works! Put the router back and BSD stops working
again. I'm writing this post from Linux, so this one works.
When it is connected
My feeling is that's something in my router that BSD doesn't like and
Linux doesn't care
(since it works).
Instead of posting my custom kernel config, I decided that I will give
it another two radical tries:
- first, I'll compile a generic kernel
- second, if the first attempt is unsuccessful, I
the usbd daemon.
usbd_flags= # Flags to
usbd (if enabled).
lpd_enable=YES
On Feb 5, 2008 11:15 PM, Kevin Kinsey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Eugen wrote:
Are there really no experienced FreeBSD users who can help me
with my behind a router problem ? Should
# Run the usbd daemon.
usbd_flags= # Flags to
usbd (if enabled).
lpd_enable=YES
Eugen,
I almost always set my FreeBSD systems up to use a static IP, even behind a
router. I don't know if you want to access your FreeBSD
Network is unreachable
I even connected directly to the cable modem as it was before I bought the
router and... surprise: it works! Put the router back and BSD stops working
again. I'm writing this post from Linux, so this one works.
The /etc/hosts and /etc/dhclient.conf are the original ones
0xff00
ping 192.168.1.1 and traceroute 192.168.1.1 give Network is unreachable
I even connected directly to the cable modem as it was before I bought the
router and... surprise: it works! Put the router back and BSD stops working
again. I'm writing this post from Linux, so this one works
That's what I get when I put ipv6_enable=YES in /etc/rc.conf :
$ ifconfig -a
dc0: flags=8843UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST metric 0 mtu 1500
options=8VLAN_MTU
ether 00:14:cf:52:b4:17
inet6 fe80::214:cfff:fe52:b417%dc0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x1
inet
Yeah you might want to attach the kernel config just to make sure
nothing was dropped that needs to be there
, when you got this dc0 ip of 192.168.1.33 was that set staticly??
On Wed, 2008-02-06 at 22:48 -0600, Eugen wrote:
That's what I get when I put ipv6_enable=YES in /etc/rc.conf :
$
Are there really no experienced FreeBSD users who can help me
with my behind a router problem ? Should I post it again ?
Should I just give up using BSD altogether due to an unusable
system? I would not like this idea, I was really starting to like it.
Respectfully,
Eugen
Eugen wrote:
Are there really no experienced FreeBSD users who can help me
with my behind a router problem ? Should I post it again ?
Should I just give up using BSD altogether due to an unusable
system? I would not like this idea, I was really starting to like it.
I'm not a very experienced
At 07:24 PM 2/5/2008, Eugen wrote:
Are there really no experienced FreeBSD users who can help me
with my behind a router problem ? Should I post it again ?
Should I just give up using BSD altogether due to an unusable
system? I would not like this idea, I was really starting to like
Eugen wrote:
Are there really no experienced FreeBSD users who can help me
with my behind a router problem ? Should I post it again ?
Should I just give up using BSD altogether due to an unusable
system? I would not like this idea, I was really starting to like it.
Respectfully,
Eugen
Hello
My apologies to you and the list.
thanks,
jeremy
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sunday 03 February 2008 14:47:47 Eugen wrote:
The configuration files for FreeBSD are shown below.
The output of ifconfig and netstat are also shown for BSD and Linux.
What confuses me is the fact that having the same router settings, when I
boot in Linux the network is usable, while
(wireless) and BSD doesn't. This tells me that the settings in the
router are OK.
Eugen
On Feb 4, 2008 12:06 PM, Mel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sunday 03 February 2008 14:47:47 Eugen wrote:
The configuration files for FreeBSD are shown below.
The output of ifconfig and netstat are also shown
On Sun, 3 Feb 2008 02:24:43 -0500 Jeremy Gransden wrote:
please fix the line wrap in your email. It is unreadable
And you really neaded to quote over 600 lines just to write that?
Regards,
Chris
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
On Sat, 2 Feb 2008 21:49:55 -0800 (PST) Eugen Udma wrote:
I took the liberty of cleaning up you post. Please fix your line wrap! One
word per line is not what I call easy reading.
I had a working minimal FreeBSD system until I put it behind a wireless
router. Since then, my network
I edited my original post for the wrapping problem and, as a result of
Christian Baer response, I tried the default settings, so now I have the
original (empty) /etc/dhclient.conf. Same result.
I had a working minimal FreeBSD system until I put it behind a wireless
router. Since then my network
201 - 300 of 804 matches
Mail list logo
