On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 12:59 PM, James Smallacombe u...@3.am wrote:
To follow up on this: Noticed the issue again this morning, which also was
accompanied by latency so high that I could not connect (some pings got
through at very high latency). I emailed the provider and they told me that
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 10:51 AM, James Smallacombe u...@3.am wrote:
Some updates that may confuse more than inform: I caught this while it was
happening yesterday and was able to do a tcpdump. I saw a ton of UDP
traffic outbound to one IP that turned out to be a colocated server in
Chicago.
Hi--
On Jan 29, 2010, at 8:51 AM, James Smallacombe wrote:
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 12:59 PM, James Smallacombe u...@3.am wrote:
To follow up on this: Noticed the issue again this morning, which also was
accompanied by latency so high that I could not connect (some pings got
through at very
On Wed, 27 Jan 2010, Chuck Swiger wrote:
Hi--
On Jan 27, 2010, at 1:15 PM, James Smallacombe wrote:
Jan 26 21:50:32 host named[667]: client IP REMOVED#57938: error sending
response: not enough free resources
Jan 26 21:50:32 host named[667]: client IP REMOVED#59830: error sending
response:
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 12:59 PM, James Smallacombe u...@3.am wrote:
To follow up on this: Noticed the issue again this morning, which also was
accompanied by latency so high that I could not connect (some pings got
through at very high latency). I emailed the provider and they told me that
NOTE: Please reply off-list as well as I am not subscribed
My server (7.2-STABLE) suffered at least two outages Sunday through
yesterday after having been up since July (it is a rented dedicated server
with my FSBD install). The first time, I was able to log in via remotely,
saw a ton of
On Jan 27, 2010, at 10:24 AM, James Smallacombe wrote:
NOTE: Please reply off-list as well as I am not subscribed
OK. In return, please don't cross-post or multi-post the same question to
multiple FreeBSD lists.
My server (7.2-STABLE) suffered at least two outages Sunday through yesterday
On Wed, 27 Jan 2010, Chuck Swiger wrote:
On Jan 27, 2010, at 10:24 AM, James Smallacombe wrote:
NOTE: Please reply off-list as well as I am not subscribed
OK. In return, please don't cross-post or multi-post the same question
to multiple FreeBSD lists.
I posted to the -isp list a couple
Hi--
On Jan 27, 2010, at 1:15 PM, James Smallacombe wrote:
Jan 26 21:50:32 host named[667]: client IP REMOVED#57938: error sending
response: not enough free resources
Jan 26 21:50:32 host named[667]: client IP REMOVED#59830: error sending
response: not enough free resources
Were these
On Wed, 27 Jan 2010, Chuck Swiger wrote:
On Jan 27, 2010, at 1:15 PM, James Smallacombe wrote:
Jan 26 21:50:32 host named[667]: client IP REMOVED#57938: error
sending response: not enough free resources
indicates a problem sending UDP traffic; netstat -s output would be
Unfortunately, I
Steve Bertrand wrote:
Chris St Denis wrote:
Steve Bertrand wrote:
What type of device is em1 attached to? Is it a switch or a hub? Is it
possible to upgrade this? You should upgrade it to 100 (or 1000)
anyways. Does this device show any collisions?
This is a dedicated
This is a dedicated server in a datacenter. I don't know the exact
switch specs but it's likely a
layer 2/3 managed switch. Probably a 1U catalyst.
you mean cisco?
there are actually most problematic switches. They don't properly
autonegotiate speed and full/half duplex with many network
- the network/LAN named tries to sent UDP packet is somehow flooded.
Dns is probably fairly busy. It's the primary authorative dns for some
busy domains.
Is there a setting I can do to increase the limits of UDP packets to keep
it from
causing problems?
it would need
On Wednesday 03 June 2009 00:46:20 Wojciech Puchar wrote:
named[69750]: client *ip removed*: error sending response: not
enough free resources
quite misleading message, but the problem is that named want to send UDP
packet and get's error from kernel.
possible reasons
- your
possible reasons
- your firewall rules are the cause - check it.
- your network card produce problems (REALLY i have that case)
- the network/LAN named tries to sent UDP packet is somehow flooded.
- the network card changes from UP to DOWN state at the time of the error
See that a lot running
On Wednesday 03 June 2009 11:48:48 Wojciech Puchar wrote:
possible reasons
- your firewall rules are the cause - check it.
- your network card produce problems (REALLY i have that case)
- the network/LAN named tries to sent UDP packet is somehow flooded.
- the network card changes
Not really. The point is that at the time the network card goes from up to
down, named spits out this error. If you log named to a different log file
then /var/log/messages, you will not see the relation. The reason for changing
this is one reason i always change syslog.conf to configure
I occasionally get named errors like these in my messages log. I've done
a lot of searching and have found others with similar problems, but no
solutions.
named[69750]: client *ip removed*: error sending response: not
enough free resources
named[69750]: client *ip removed*: error
lot of searching and have found others with similar problems, but no
solutions.
named[69750]: client *ip removed*: error sending response: not
enough free resources
named[69750]: client *ip removed*: error sending response: not
enough free resources
named[69750]: client *ip removed
Wojciech Puchar wrote:
lot of searching and have found others with similar problems, but no
solutions.
named[69750]: client *ip removed*: error sending response: not
enough free resources
named[69750]: client *ip removed*: error sending response: not
enough free resources
named[69750
Chris St Denis wrote:
Wojciech Puchar wrote:
possible reasons
- your firewall rules are the cause - check it.
Nope
eureka# ipfw list
- your network card produce problems (REALLY i have that case)
I have had this kind of error on multiple servers over the years, so
i
Steve Bertrand wrote:
Chris St Denis wrote:
Wojciech Puchar wrote:
possible reasons
- your firewall rules are the cause - check it.
Nope
eureka# ipfw list
- your network card produce problems (REALLY i have that case)
I have had this kind of error on multiple servers over the
Steve Bertrand wrote:
Steve Bertrand wrote:
Chris St Denis wrote:
Wojciech Puchar wrote:
possible reasons
- your firewall rules are the cause - check it.
Nope
eureka# ipfw list
- your network card produce problems (REALLY i have that case)
I have had this kind of error on
Steve Bertrand wrote:
Chris St Denis wrote:
Wojciech Puchar wrote:
possible reasons
- your firewall rules are the cause - check it.
Nope
eureka# ipfw list
- your network card produce problems (REALLY i have that case)
I have had this kind of error on
On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 4:46 PM, Wojciech Puchar
woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl wrote:
lot of searching and have found others with similar problems, but no
solutions.
named[69750]: client *ip removed*: error sending response: not
enough free resources
named[69750]: client *ip removed
snip
- the network/LAN named tries to sent UDP packet is somehow flooded.
Dns is probably fairly busy. It's the primary authorative dns for
some busy domains. Is there a setting I can do to increase the
limits of UDP packets to keep it from causing problems?
/snip
If you extend the
Chris St Denis wrote:
Steve Bertrand wrote:
What type of device is em1 attached to? Is it a switch or a hub? Is it
possible to upgrade this? You should upgrade it to 100 (or 1000)
anyways. Does this device show any collisions?
This is a dedicated server in a datacenter. I don't know the
27 matches
Mail list logo
