On Fri, Feb 21, 2003 at 02:40:29PM -0500, Jason Dixon wrote:
I don't want anyone's hair to stand on end, but I was just curious...
with the clarification recently given by the Linux camp on the
NFS/DF-bit issue, is there an effort currently under way to recognize
and support their
On Fri, Feb 21, 2003 at 08:59:58PM +0100, Srebrenko Sehic wrote:
AFAIK, this issue is fixed -current and will be in 3.3.
Yes, the no-df option has been modified in -current so it applies
earlier and also covers fragments with DF (clearing the DF flag), so you
can make these NFS connections work
On Fri, 2003-02-21 at 15:04, Nathan Ryan Milford wrote:
PF does not break Linux NFS.
Using the scrub directive will probably detect and drop packets from Linux
NFS as they decided to not follow standards.
I'm not a pf developer, but I'd doubt they'd waste thier time on something
that
I'm not suggesting it's PF's fault (hence the quotes around broken).
If you've followed recent developments, you'd understand the reason
Linux NFS doesn't work through normalized PF (scrub) is that the PF
developers refused to respect the DF bit on fragmented Linux NFS traffic
without
Hi I think I remember reading about this in -current. However, I am
trying to establist multiple pflogs. Ie a 2nd one for some specific
packets. Could someone explain how you go about this? Or it not possible
in 3.2 -patch ?
-James
On Fri, 21 Feb 2003, pf-list wrote:
Hi I think I remember reading about this in -current. However, I am
trying to establist multiple pflogs. Ie a 2nd one for some specific
packets. Could someone explain how you go about this? Or it not possible
in 3.2 -patch ?
Did you RTFM?
pflogd(8)
I'm getting crashes whenever I put a heavy load on the fw/bridge that I have
setup. I'm not sure if the issue is memory or otherwise--my guess is it's
PF-related; is there any way to be sure?
Among other scenarios, I'm getting crashes whenever I try to move files
between one Windows box (located
