Can someone verify that the setup does, in fact, support the RFC?
I.e. - use hping or other packet crafting tool to generate a big (say,
4K) TCP packet with the "don't fragment" flag set, and see (with
tcpdump, or a real sniffer, such as ethereal) whether a "fragment
needed" ICMP is sent.
If
On Tue, 12 Jun 2001, Miki Shapiro wrote:
> My opinion however remains that it is completely unneccesary to lower MTU
> on all your windows clients and the linux ether interface, for the
> benefit of time that you buy - the extra time that it takes your linux
> router to get a too-large chunk, d
I already posted this about 2 weeks ago.
1. Can anyone reccommend GUIless Linux Network-activity,
CPU-activity and memory-usage monitoring+logging tools? preferrably that
speak SNMP...
(as in a working program that is optimized for this job, not how to run
top, free and uptime from a cron job,
Try typing getright.exe /? from commandline. If there is something it
cannot do, I don't think I've stumbled accross it yet.
Yes, it's adware, and if you don't mind paying for a very good program the
price of a pizza, it's worth every cent.
Volunteers to port getright to gtk or kde? :-)))
---
On Mon, 11 Jun 2001, Shachar Shemesh wrote:
> However, some protocols (such as TCP) don't care where their packets
> end, and only about the entire stream. In order to save on fragmantation
> costs, they employ an algorithm called "Path MTU". Each packet is sent
> with an IP flag called "Don't
On Mon, 11 Jun 2001, Ilya Konstantinov wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 07:36:46PM +0300, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> > On Mon, 11 Jun 2001, Eddie Harari wrote:
> >
> > > I would check DNS lookup.
> > >
> > > if this is not a DNS problem than why not use tcpdump to dump all packets
> > > and reply tim
On Mon, 11 Jun 2001, Yoni Cohen wrote:
> I have an 20G HD, there are already two partitions for windows (FAT32).
> I want to install RH 6.2 Server on different partition, when i try to create
> new 4G 'Linux native' partition under mount point /, i get an error message
> "Boot partition too big"
On Mon, 11 Jun 2001, Baruch Even wrote:
> * Yoni Cohen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010611 21:39]:
> > Hi list,
> >
> > I have an 20G HD, there are already two partitions for windows (FAT32).
> > I want to install RH 6.2 Server on different partition, when i try to create
> > new 4G 'Linux native' partit
On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 07:36:46PM +0300, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Jun 2001, Eddie Harari wrote:
>
> > I would check DNS lookup.
> >
> > if this is not a DNS problem than why not use tcpdump to dump all packets
> > and reply times ???
> > see if the request goes out and then understand
* Yoni Cohen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010611 21:39]:
> Hi list,
>
> I have an 20G HD, there are already two partitions for windows (FAT32).
> I want to install RH 6.2 Server on different partition, when i try to create
> new 4G 'Linux native' partition under mount point /, i get an error message
>
Do follow the link for the `Read More...' on my announcement on IGLU front
page about the June 13th Bar-Ilan meeting and make your comments. After giving
details about the meeting central topic you will find information about
Bar-Ilan university current plans for the Linux meetings.
I was give
Hi list,
I have an 20G HD, there are already two partitions for windows (FAT32).
I want to install RH 6.2 Server on different partition, when i try to create
new 4G 'Linux native' partition under mount point /, i get an error message
"Boot partition too big", this message appeared also when the
On Mon, 11 Jun 2001, Eddie Harari wrote:
> I would check DNS lookup.
>
> if this is not a DNS problem than why not use tcpdump to dump all packets
> and reply times ???
> see if the request goes out and then understand what is going on ?
No need to go as far as tcpdump. wget clearly writes when
Ok, I'll add my 4 cents.
That's two for the fragmantation mechanism, and two for the "all hosts
on the network" question. I'm afraid nothing of what I say will actually
answer the original question.
First - fraging:
When a router receives a packet which is too big to transfer to the next
hop,
.. Is your ISP running a transparent proxy... ?
As Mulix said...
> try fetching it in windows from the command line as well, just to rule
> out caching. .
:-)
---= Miki Shapiro =--
---= Cell: (+972)-56-322433 =
---= ICQ: 3EE853 =---
---= Windows
Can you send an example URL?
---= Miki Shapiro =--
---= Cell: (+972)-56-322433 =
---= ICQ: 3EE853 =---
---= Windows Programmer in Rehab =---
-
"If at first you don't succeed...
.. Skydiving is probbably not fo
> The MTU limit is because bezeq uses a fast ATM backbone for the whole
> ADSL operation. ATM works with little packets. Also, even in LANs, system
> administrator rarly give a MTU larger than 8K since this tends to slow
> down RTT (round trip time).
In most LANs I know, the MTU on all machines o
On Mon, 11 Jun 2001, Udi Kalifon wrote:
> When using Windows to load a tiny Java applet from a server on our LAN, it
> takes less than 5 seconds to load the applet. However, from Linux (RedHat 7.1)
> it takes nearly 4 minutes !!
are you absolutely sure it's downloaded, and not retreived from loc
I would check DNS lookup.
if this is not a DNS problem than why not use tcpdump to dump all packets
and reply times ???
see if the request goes out and then understand what is going on ?
-Original Message-
From: Udi Kalifon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, June 11, 2001 4:43
When using Windows to load a tiny Java applet from a server on our LAN, it
takes less than 5 seconds to load the applet. However, from Linux (RedHat 7.1)
it takes nearly 4 minutes !!
It's not a Netscape problem either -- I tried using 'wget' on the command line
and it also took way too long ju
hi miki,
| I
| ---
| If I understood this correctly from Mulix, when a too-large packet
| containing ppp-encapsulated stuff comes to the ADSL modem on
| ethernet interface and wants to go on the DSL interface, the frarmentation
| mechanism of the modem (I'm talking about my ATUR3) is broken
On Mon, 11 Jun 2001, Shlomo Matichin wrote:
> well, it a bit beyond that. when you are NAT-ing, you are considered a
> router, so when a packet that it bigger than the MTU of the outgoing
> link is sent, you drop the packet. but an ICMP message "please fragment"
> returns to the original sender.
> It is my complete guess that the Linux 'NAT' code forwards packets and
> only rewrites the source IP/port address on outgoing packets and does
> not modify the packet in any other way (like fragmenting it). Someone
> correct me if I am wrong ;)
You're both correct and incorrect.
You're lookin
On Mon, 11 Jun 2001, Miki Shapiro wrote:
> Now to fragmentation problems:
>
> Fragmentation is done when data passes between layers, and, providing that
> I trust my ISP's tunnel enterance and my linux router's tunnel exit (or
> vice versa), fragmentation somewhere in the tunnel infrastructure
This is partially OT, but I believe in the general interest of all (who
use or ever plan to use ADSL).
Here's what I figured out from using it/reading the list/reading Mulix's
excelent howto, and talking to lots of friends who also did this:
If I understand correctly, your home box (let's call i
The gist of your problem is that the registrar resolves your host during
registration. This means that dynamic names won't work.
What you need, then, is some service that would mirror your domain, and
would supply the front end you need.
You can try "soa.grantiecanyon.com", if they are still up,
hello.
i've got a big problem with named that i cant understand so maybe you
can.. and it goes like that:
i am running named on my personal box.
i own a domain name that i registered by register.com.
my connaction is cable 24/7 of tevel.. and as you know (or not) this is
not a static ip. when i w
27 matches
Mail list logo
