Re: [PATCH] ipv6 compile fix, __FUNCTION__ pasting, 2.5.33

   From: James Morris <jmorris <at> intercode.com.au>
   Date: Sun, 1 Sep 2002 12:05:13 +1000 (EST)

   Another __FUNCTION__ pasting fix, for 2.5.33.

Applied to my tree.

Re: Grillen???

 Hallo Karin,

> wollen wir heute noch grillen?

Klar, ich bringe Getränke und Kuchen mit. 18 Uhr ist o.k.

> Hast Du den Link noch zu dieser "dunklen" Seite? Du weißt schon, 
> wo wir das letzemal darüber gesprochen haben..

 Willst Du jetzt doch an den Typen schreiben? Na, viel Erfolg 

Hier der Link[1]

Wir sehen uns!
Evelyn

--- Links ---
   1 http://claudia.xfiles24.com

IPv6 MTU of a tunnel: 2 different switches, which wins?

Hi,

sure here anyone can help me:

Let's say I have an internet connection via PPPoE through ppp0/eth1

MTU eth1: 1500
MTU ppp0: 1492

Over this connection, an IPv6 (named tun6to4) tunnel will be
established. Now I have 2 different switches to adjust the MTU of the
tunnel.

a) using utility ip
b) using sysctl

After unmodified MTU setup:

a)
# ip link show dev tun6to4 | grep -w mtu
42: tun6to4 <at> NONE: <NOARP,UP> mtu 1480 qdisc noqueue

b)
# sysctl -a| grep tun6to4 | grep mtu
net.ipv6.conf.tun6to4.mtu = 1480

But proper MTU will be

MTU tun6to4: 1472   MTU(ppp0) - 20 for IPv4 header

Re: [Lse-tech] Re: (RFC): SKB Initialization

>On Tue, 27 Aug 2002, Mala Anand wrote:

>> SPECweb99 profile shows that __kfree_skb is in the top 5 hot routines.
We
>> will test the skb recycle patch on SPECweb99 and add skbinit patch
>> to that and see how it helps.  What I understand is that the skb recycle
>> patch does not attempt to recycle if the skbs are allocated on CPU
>> and freed on another CPU. Is that right? If so, skbinit patch will help
>> those cases.

>yes it will. Not significant is my current thinking. i.e i wouldn't write
>my mother to tell her about it.

I have not looked at Robert's recycle skb patch yet. I couldn't
find it in the link he sent me so I don't know how it works. However
I thought about it a little more and realized that even when you
recycle the skbs, they need to be initialized (cleaned up). I don't
understand how
can the recycle skb patch avoid calling constructors and destructors for
the
skb.  The skbs are given back to the driver instead of freeing to the skb
hot list
or to the slab. That does not eliminate the part of the code of kfree_skb
which
releases dst, initializes part of skb and executes destructor.
Tell me if I am wrong but wouldn't it break the code. So I do think that
recycle skb patch will not mitigate the benefits of the skb init
patch.

"Loopback" route through two cards?

Hi all,

	I know this is an FAQ, but I never saw an answer I liked.  We
want to stress-test a couple of gigabit NICs by connecting them to
each other and routing packets out one and into the other.  Is this
still impossible without nat?

Rusty.
--
  Anyone who quotes me in their sig is an idiot. -- Rusty Russell.

¤£¥i¿ù¹LÁÈ¿úªº¦n¾÷·|¡I¡I

Re: "Loopback" route through two cards?

Unless you are trying to stress test NAT, i wouldnt go the NAT path.
Have you looked at the packet generator in 2.4.19? With it you can
bypass IP totaly.

cheers,
jamal

On Tue, 3 Sep 2002, Rusty Russell wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> 	I know this is an FAQ, but I never saw an answer I liked.  We
> want to stress-test a couple of gigabit NICs by connecting them to
> each other and routing packets out one and into the other.  Is this
> still impossible without nat?
>
> Rusty.
> --
>   Anyone who quotes me in their sig is an idiot. -- Rusty Russell.
>

Re: "Loopback" route through two cards?

Hello!

> 	I know this is an FAQ, but I never saw an answer I liked.

And what kind of answers do you like? 

> still impossible

It depends on sense which you put to "impossible".

There are two problems with this:

1. You cannot send to local address via any device but loopback.

   The only way to override this is to use explicit SO_BINDTODEVICE
   on sending socket. Hence, it is "impossible" not changing application. 

2. You cannot receive packets with local address from any device
   but loopback.

   This is impossible, but wthis time without not editing kernel,
   removing the check for local addresses in fib_validate_source().

Alexey

ScanMail Message: To Recipient virus found and action taken.

ScanMail for Microsoft Exchange has detected virus-infected attachment(s).

Sender = itc <at> oltchim.ro
Recipient(s) = netdev <at> oss.sgi.com
Subject = Vendor opinions at 
Scanning Time = 09/04/2002 07:38:26

Action on virus found:
The attachment Mgzd.exe matched file blocking settings. ScanMail has Moved
it.  The attachment was moved to C:\Program
Files\Trend\Smex\Alert\Mgzd3d759c52344.exe_.

Warning to recipient. ScanMail has detected a virus.

Re: ScanMail Message: To Recipient virus found and action taken. (offtopic)

Offtopic, path disclosure...an issue for Bugtraq/FullDisclosure?

        Peter

--On Wednesday, September 04, 2002 07:38:26 AM +0200 System Attendant
<HRTADES2-SA <at> siemens.atea.be> wrote:

> ScanMail for Microsoft Exchange has detected virus-infected
> attachment(s).
> 
> Sender = itc <at> oltchim.ro
> Recipient(s) = netdev <at> oss.sgi.com
> Subject = Vendor opinions at 
> Scanning Time = 09/04/2002 07:38:26
> 
> Action on virus found:
> The attachment Mgzd.exe matched file blocking settings. ScanMail
> has Moved it.  The attachment was moved to C:\Program
> Files\Trend\Smex\Alert\Mgzd3d759c52344.exe_.
> 
> Warning to recipient. ScanMail has detected a virus.
> 
> 
>