On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 02:03:54PM +0200, Vadim Kochan wrote:
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 01:07:24PM +0200, Vadim Kochan wrote:
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 12:12:54PM +0100, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
On 03/23/2015 11:37 AM, Vadim Kochan wrote:
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 11:25:26AM +0100, Lorenzo
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 12:12:54PM +0100, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
On 03/23/2015 11:37 AM, Vadim Kochan wrote:
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 11:25:26AM +0100, Lorenzo Pistone wrote:
...
Thats what I got on 3.18 with the same cfg file:
$ trafgen/trafgen -c ~/trafgen.cfg -o wlp3s0 -n 1
4
On 03/23/2015 11:37 AM, Vadim Kochan wrote:
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 11:25:26AM +0100, Lorenzo Pistone wrote:
...
Thats what I got on 3.18 with the same cfg file:
$ trafgen/trafgen -c ~/trafgen.cfg -o wlp3s0 -n 1
4 packets to schedule
168 bytes in total
Running! Hang up with ^C!
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 01:07:24PM +0200, Vadim Kochan wrote:
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 12:12:54PM +0100, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
On 03/23/2015 11:37 AM, Vadim Kochan wrote:
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 11:25:26AM +0100, Lorenzo Pistone wrote:
...
Thats what I got on 3.18 with the same cfg file:
Hi Lorenzo,
On 03/22/2015 03:13 PM, Lorenzo Pistone wrote:
Hi,
I'm trying to send UDP packets with zero length withthis simple configuration
on trafgen:
{
# --- ethernet header ---
0xbe, 0x15, 0x1d, 0x12, 0x1c, 0x57, # mac destination
0xfa, 0x16, 0x3e, 0xa0, 0x5d,
On 03/23/2015 03:39 PM, Lorenzo Pistone wrote:
I'm checking with netsniff-ng, I use the same interface with which I'm sending
this email
Ok, well that doesn't work. If you emit packets with trafgen, it
uses by default a path that bypasses the traffic control layer.
If you really want to see
So I tried now without -n, still absolutely no packet out on real
devices (contrary to lo), but when interrupting I get Cannot destroy
the TX_RING: Device or resource busy! for each CPU (so 4 times in my
case). Looks like a start.
Il 23/03/2015 10:27, Daniel Borkmann ha scritto:
Hi Lorenzo,
On 03/23/2015 03:24 PM, Lorenzo Pistone wrote:
I don't get the same message (obviously) with not -n but -t, however still no
packet gets out.
Well, with -t you'll be using sendto(), so that's expected.
So let me ask a stupid question, assuming you don't use -n and therefore
not hit this
I'm checking with netsniff-ng, I use the same interface with which I'm
sending this email
Il 23/03/2015 15:33, Daniel Borkmann ha scritto:
On 03/23/2015 03:24 PM, Lorenzo Pistone wrote:
I don't get the same message (obviously) with not -n but -t, however
still no packet gets out.
Well, with
On 2015-03-21 at 22:58:17 +0100, Vadim Kochan vadi...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Vadim Kochan vadi...@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Vadim Kochan vadi...@gmail.com
Applied, thank you Vadim!
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
netsniff-ng group.
To unsubscribe
I was hoping you could give me debugging tips. I checked all I could
(dmesg, echo 1 rp_filter, strace -f), and I couldn't see anything
suspicious. I have nothing in my iptables or tc, and tso is off.The
exact command line is strace -f trafgen -c theconfig.cfg -o wlp3s0 -n 10.
Il 23/03/2015
11 matches
Mail list logo
