From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Jul 26 11:53:16 2013
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2FFAB653
 for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Fri, 26 Jul 2013 11:53:16 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from feld@freebsd.org)
Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com
 [66.111.4.25])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 046B02460
 for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Fri, 26 Jul 2013 11:53:15 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from compute6.internal (compute6.nyi.mail.srv.osa [10.202.2.46])
 by gateway1.nyi.mail.srv.osa (Postfix) with ESMTP id B54AD20F43
 for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Fri, 26 Jul 2013 07:53:14 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from web3 ([10.202.2.213])
 by compute6.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 26 Jul 2013 07:53:14 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=
 messagingengine.com; h=message-id:from:to:mime-version
 :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:in-reply-to:references
 :subject:date; s=smtpout; bh=8UOWk980zGY1QGZakySFkbLbfaQ=; b=dcj
 p3ZM740zx4lvPbvW+s9kolGhcd1466lAt7/AXHkfjpo0aIUny53J3VeW/f8y/PrX
 E23dS9R40Xy8/UaKeezpckDec316uSbvtSlIFjP/JCxNinNLGA+44/DJHWyLYnAg
 L0OF7zmnzBDfkXnaWFZSZxgR+Ege0tsDSJDCwCjI=
Received: by web3.nyi.mail.srv.osa (Postfix, from userid 99)
 id 9B78CB01D6C; Fri, 26 Jul 2013 07:53:14 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <1374839594.21160.1849239.4F1117A1@webmail.messagingengine.com>
X-Sasl-Enc: GnHkoE2iMcCrXVO2OqoQTSdYNshRHcvI9n0RgE+sjpIp 1374839594
From: Mark Felder <feld@freebsd.org>
To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain
X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface - ajax-23e62cd3
In-Reply-To: <CA+whn7T_OyTCW_qd2tAYY6E5=whRNc6w-tDV37=wMMv4xkHA3g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+whn7StUGJH014tKx7TpeUomFO3RB9Sqv3DgTRNAgaM66kaPA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+whn7T_OyTCW_qd2tAYY6E5=whRNc6w-tDV37=wMMv4xkHA3g@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: panic: kmem_map too small at heavy packet traffic
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2013 06:53:14 -0500
X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14
Precedence: list
List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD
 <freebsd-hackers.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-hackers>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
 <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2013 11:53:16 -0000

I've been under the impression that synproxy was broken for quite some
time, but I know there has been a lot of work on pf in HEAD so I can't
be sure where it might stand there. Can anyone confirm/deny this?

And not to discourage you, but the pf documentation does say "Routine
use of this option is not recommended, however, as it breaks expected
TCP protocol behavior when the server can't process the request..."

However, panics are never good and hopefully someone can help you figure
it out.