Re: [lwip-users] http server problems/bug

sorry, I　post it through mail lwip-users@nongnu.org now. -- View this message in context: http://lwip.100.n7.nabble.com/http-server-problems-bug-tp26999p27016.html Sent from the lwip-users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ lwip-users

Re: [lwip-users] http server problems/bug

> 2.we did post the capture files “wireshark.pcapng” ,which is just > above the snapshots. Not in this list, maybe in nabble, but many of us don't use nabble. I would try the server alone, you might have some task leaking. ___ lwip-users mailing list

Re: [lwip-users] Force PPP TermReq (Lwip 2.0.0 RC2)

On 8/4/2016 6:30 PM, Sylvain Rochet wrote: Hello, On Thu, Aug 04, 2016 at 10:15:56AM -0400, Patrick Klos wrote: Again, the TermReq packet is an LCP packet. If your peer is ignoring all LCP packets (as you stated earlier), it's just ignore that packet as well. I'm sure you could find a way to

Re: [lwip-users] Force PPP TermReq (Lwip 2.0.0 RC2)

Hello, On Fri, Aug 05, 2016 at 12:30:41AM +0200, Sylvain Rochet wrote: > > It means sending the TermReq packet with a new random magic is not going > to work anyway, this is what the magic is for actually, to protect the > LCP channel for outsiders, hey ;-) ^^^ from

Re: [lwip-users] Force PPP TermReq (Lwip 2.0.0 RC2)

Hello, On Thu, Aug 04, 2016 at 10:15:56AM -0400, Patrick Klos wrote: > > Again, the TermReq packet is an LCP packet. If your peer is ignoring > all LCP packets (as you stated earlier), it's just ignore that packet > as well. I'm sure you could find a way to get LwIP to send the packet > -

Re: [lwip-users] Force PPP TermReq (Lwip 2.0.0 RC2)

Hi, Patrick. Thank you for the reply; I look forward to your insight. From: lwip-users On Behalf Of Patrick Klos Sent: Thursday, 04 August 2016 10:16 To: Mailing list for lwIP users Subject: Re: [lwip-users] Force PPP TermReq (Lwip 2.0.0 RC2) On 8/4/2016 9:54 AM, Greg

Re: [lwip-users] LLDP Implementation for lwIP

Hello Sergio LLDP is a multicast information only packet. It has the be sent at fixed time intervals. The second approach to have a separate driver and calling it in a timer function seems to be the approach. Again the receive packet is easy to process. The transmit needs to be thought and

Re: [lwip-users] Force PPP TermReq (Lwip 2.0.0 RC2)

On 8/4/2016 9:54 AM, Greg Smith wrote: Hello. I'm looking for a way to let a PPP peer know that the connection is dropped and needs to reestablish in 2.0.0rc2. In my case, one particular usage of this is if one peer unexpectedly resets (for example, via power loss) and then comes back up

Re: [lwip-users] http server problems/bug

yeah, 1.web server is RAW API, and we do call the API in the same thread ,say tcpip_thread; we use socket APIs in other threads. we can ensure that all the APIs is called properly in our multithreaded system. 2.we did post the capture files “wireshark.pcapng” ,which is just above the snapshots.

Re: [lwip-users] http server problems/bug

I saw this > fail ,including tcp client which is an independent thread ) and then > *Testing Conditions* > Lwip 1.4.1 , web server is based on example of ‘httpserver_raw’, > that means the web server is inside the tcpip_thread rather than an > independent thread. All lwIP RAW API functions

Re: [lwip-users] LLDP Implementation for lwIP

> psNetif->linkoutput = tivaif_transmit; > If i check the tivaif_transmit function, "tivaif_transmit(struct > netif *psNetif, struct pbuf *p)" it maps the pbuf to the MAC > controller for transmission. It is this buffer that needs to be > modified for LLDP frame. Not exactly. You need to

[lwip-users] Force PPP TermReq (Lwip 2.0.0 RC2)

Hello. I'm looking for a way to let a PPP peer know that the connection is dropped and needs to reestablish in 2.0.0rc2. In my case, one particular usage of this is if one peer unexpectedly resets (for example, via power loss) and then comes back up and wants to reconnect. At this point, it's

Re: [lwip-users] Underflow problem when reconnecting multiple times.

Hello again, I want to let you know that the issue has been solved. It turns out the problem was not LWIP related but a problem with the operating system writing into memory it should not have. I want to thank you all for your time and help. Fabian 2016-07-28 10:35 GMT+02:00 Fabian Schneider

Re: [lwip-users] raw API

Hello Sergio, I though that might be interesting for you, so in attachments is the a file again from Wireshark where I did multiple GET commands and the last one I have received more than usual. OK, that confuses me a lot!! First two times I'm receiving a 2047 bytes. Then 4094 Bytes. And the

Re: [lwip-users] raw API

Hello Sergio, You can find the wire-shark file attached to the post. Yes, you are right about server client IP's 192.168.0.2 - Server 192.168.0.1 - Client What I'm trying to achieve is to transfer a 1GB file from the server to the