Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] OI IPv4 Stack setting DF flag on fragmented UDP packets

On 12/04/17 13:01, Markus Wernig wrote: > I switched our DNS from Sol 11.3 to OI illumos-cd964fce75. After that, I > noticed that some reply packets sent by the new server would no longer > get through the firewalls. The reason appears to be that they are > fragmented, but still have the DF

Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] OI IPv4 Stack setting DF flag on fragmented UDP packets

Hi Markus Nice to see you on the List :) The First question will be who does the fragmenting and what kind of fragment are we talking about. If it is IP based it could also be a router on the way that fragments it. If it is on the DNS layer then there should just be two IP packets that should

Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] OI IPv4 Stack setting DF flag on fragmented UDP packets

>   http://whiteboard.ping.se/Networking/DnsTcp Yes, I can force BIND to switch to TCP by setting max-udp-size 1440, but that's just giving in ... > Regardless, I expect that DNS 'named' is reponsible for setting the DF > flag. Hm. On Solaris, this was also a BIND named, compiled from source

Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] OI IPv4 Stack setting DF flag on fragmented UDP packets

On Mon, 4 Dec 2017, Markus Wernig wrote: Does anybody know a way to change that behaviour? Found nothing in dladm and ipadm, and this behaviour is weird. I found this old posting http://whiteboard.ping.se/Networking/DnsTcp Google tells me that fragmented DNS messages are quite evil since

[OpenIndiana-discuss] OI IPv4 Stack setting DF flag on fragmented UDP packets

Hi all I'm in the process of migrating from Solaris 11 to OpenIndiana, of which I do not have much experience. Pleae bear with me. I switched our DNS from Sol 11.3 to OI illumos-cd964fce75. After that, I noticed that some reply packets sent by the new server would no longer get through the

Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] GCC6 build zone status

>Only ocaml remains :) >So aside from openjdk-8 I'll have 100% gcc-6 compiled userland repository by >the end of the day :) So this means that the next release of hipster will be based on gcc 6? This is certainly a big stepforward! Congratulations for this achievement! A.S.

Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] OpenIndiana or OpenSolaris version with PowerPC support?

Hi, thanks a lot for your replies, My main interest was at how the libc port was done, and specially, the support for long double in math and printf. However, looking at that github archive I couldn't find support for long double... perhaps it was never implemented, as it's incomplete as you

Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] IPMP Info

Hi OpenIndiana is not Solaris and unfortunately a few commands have not made it into the Open-Source World. I have found [1] to cover link aggregation(ipmp) which hopefully covers your case. If you remember how to do it in solaris10 that should Also work in OpenIndiana. [1]

Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] OpenIndiana or OpenSolaris version with PowerPC support?

This is the last copy I downloaded of the PPC source code 542 % ls -l sunlabs-osppc-src-20061002.tar -rw-rw-rw- 1 jkempusers373918208 Aug 17 2010 sunlabs-osppc-src-20061002.tar 543 % I believe that this was the last publically available source download, but if anyone can confirm

Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] [oi-dev] GCC6 build zone status

Aurelien, Good job! Adam > On 4 Dec 2017, at 10:45, Aurelien Larcher wrote: > > Only ocaml remains :) > So aside from openjdk-8 I'll have 100% gcc-6 compiled userland repository by > the end of the day :) > > Le Samedi 2 décembre 2017, Aurelien Larcher a écrit :

Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] GCC6 build zone status

Only ocaml remains :) So aside from openjdk-8 I'll have 100% gcc-6 compiled userland repository by the end of the day :) Le Samedi 2 décembre 2017, Aurelien Larcher a écrit : > It seems that only ocaml and open-vm-tools remain since Andreas fixed > spidermonkey. > Thanks :) > > Le Samedi 2