From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jul 28 13:22:29 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6566E1065677 for ; Mon, 28 Jul 2008 13:22:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gdakos@enovation.gr) Received: from t1088.8com.gr (t1088.8com.gr [89.163.145.23]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A40118FC15 for ; Mon, 28 Jul 2008 13:22:28 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gdakos@enovation.gr) Received: from John ([83.235.249.6]) by t1088.8com.gr (IceWarp 9.1.0) with SMTP id IUK60835 for ; Mon, 28 Jul 2008 15:08:35 +0200 Message-ID: From: "John Dakos [ Enovation Technologies ]" To: References: <20080728120020.5E74E10656BE@hub.freebsd.org> Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2008 16:08:42 +0300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5512 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5512 Subject: 'help' X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2008 13:22:29 -0000 ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Monday, July 28, 2008 3:00 PM Subject: freebsd-questions Digest, Vol 226, Issue 2 > Send freebsd-questions mailing list submissions to > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at > freebsd-questions-owner@freebsd.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of freebsd-questions digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: malloc options (Karl Vogel) > 2. Re: malloc options (Giorgos Keramidas) > 3. Network, routers, DHCP and PXE (Svein Halvor Halvorsen) > 4. Re: Network, routers, DHCP and PXE (Manolis Kiagias) > 5. Re: Binary upgrade from legacy version + ports > (Jan Henrik Sylvester) > 6. Re: Network, routers, DHCP and PXE (Subhro) > 7. Re: Network, routers, DHCP and PXE (Svein Halvor Halvorsen) > 8. Re: Network, routers, DHCP and PXE (Manolis Kiagias) > 9. Re: Network, routers, DHCP and PXE (Svein Halvor Halvorsen) > 10. Re: Network, routers, DHCP and PXE (Manolis Kiagias) > 11. wget vs fetch (Marcel Grandemange) > 12. wget vs fetch (Marcel Grandemange) > 13. RE: wget vs fetch (Marcel Grandemange) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Sun, 27 Jul 2008 21:55:39 -0400 (EDT) > From: vogelke+software@pobox.com (Karl Vogel) > Subject: Re: malloc options > To: Giorgos Keramidas > Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > Message-ID: <20080728015539.70030B7B9@kev.msw.wpafb.af.mil> > >>> On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 17:36:35 -0700, >>> Doug Hardie wrote: > > D> The program has worked under considerable load for many years with > versions > D> 3.7 to 6.2. Problems only occur with 7.0. The program is quite > complex > D> and big. It uses probably hundreds of mallocs in a typical use. The > D> problems only occur reasonably randomly and only under quite heavy > load. > D> The developer is looking into it, but the problem only occurs on > FreeBSD > D> 7.0, not any other Unix systems. In the meantime I am losing money > because > D> of it. > >>> On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 05:03:58 +0300, >>> Giorgos Keramidas said: > > G> While that's understandable, the current malloc() has undergone quite > G> extensive testing by Jason Evans and a lot of people who use it in > FreeBSD > G> 7.X or later. Its ability to expose bugs in this way was deemed > important > G> enough that it is now used by other projects too. > > I ran into a similar problem with the BSD allocator running under heavy > load that didn't happen under any Solaris or Linux system I used. I > finally fixed it by using Doug Lea's malloc just for this one > application: > > http://shell.siscom.net/~vogelke/Software/Languages/C/Libraries/malloc/ > > This was under FreeBSD 6.*, but it might provide another data point if > you > want to give it a try. > > -- > Karl Vogel I don't speak for the USAF or my company > vogelke at pobox dot com http://www.pobox.com/~vogelke > > And God said, "Let there be vodka!" And saw that it was good. Then God > said, "Let there be light!" And then said, "Whoa - too much light." > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2008 07:13:50 +0300 > From: Giorgos Keramidas > Subject: Re: malloc options > To: vogelke+software@pobox.com > Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > Message-ID: <87k5f6odc1.fsf@kobe.laptop> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 21:55:39 -0400 (EDT), vogelke+software@pobox.com (Karl > Vogel) wrote: >>>> On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 17:36:35 -0700, >>>> Doug Hardie wrote: >> >> D> The program has worked under considerable load for many years with >> D> versions 3.7 to 6.2. Problems only occur with 7.0. The program is >> D> quite complex and big. It uses probably hundreds of mallocs in a >> D> typical use. The problems only occur reasonably randomly and only >> D> under quite heavy load. The developer is looking into it, but the >> D> problem only occurs on FreeBSD 7.0, not any other Unix systems. In >> D> the meantime I am losing money because of it. >> >>>> On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 05:03:58 +0300, >>>> Giorgos Keramidas said: >> >> G> While that's understandable, the current malloc() has undergone >> G> quite extensive testing by Jason Evans and a lot of people who use >> G> it in FreeBSD 7.X or later. Its ability to expose bugs in this way >> G> was deemed important enough that it is now used by other projects >> G> too. >> >> I ran into a similar problem with the BSD allocator running under >> heavy load that didn't happen under any Solaris or Linux system I >> used. I finally fixed it by using Doug Lea's malloc just for this one >> application: >> >> >> http://shell.siscom.net/~vogelke/Software/Languages/C/Libraries/malloc/ >> >> This was under FreeBSD 6.*, but it might provide another data point if >> you want to give it a try. > > I'm not sure how similar the two problems are. I quite frankly know > _very_ little of what the original problem was, other than "I am > encountering issues where values just seem to arbitrarily change". > > Memory exhaustion is a potential problem with almost any sort of > allocator that fragments memory in any way, but random corruption of > user data is probably a different issue :/ > > If you have some sort of description of the workload that triggered the > memory exhaustion with jemalloc (the current malloc implementation in > FreeBSD), it's probably a good idea to talk to Jason Evans about it (his > email is "jasone" at FreeBSD.org). He may be able to help you tune > malloc or even make changes to the system version of malloc that make it > less vulnerable to this sort of problem. > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2008 09:18:23 +0200 > From: Svein Halvor Halvorsen > Subject: Network, routers, DHCP and PXE > To: questions@freebsd.org > Message-ID: <488D72BF.80205@lvor.halvorsen.cc> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > Hi, list! > > > I have a private home network, on an ADSL2+ connection to the > internet. The home network is behind NAT, all automatically set up > by the router/dhcp server/wlan access point/adsl modem that I got > from my ISP. It's a Thomson SpeedTouch 585 router. > > Now, on this network, most of the computers get their IP by means of > DHCP. Except our home audio server, which have a hard coded ip > address in rc.conf, set to something within the range of the dhcp > server (10.0.0.2-10.0.0.253). The server seems to pick this up, and > don't give that address away to someone else. > > I've tried using other addresses outside this range, like 10.0.1.1, > but that doesn't work. All network access is lost when I do that. > > Now, on my local network I'd like to put a diskless machine. As I > understand it, my DHCP server needs to tell the client about the > "filename" and a "next-server" to use. I don't think I can setup the > Thomson router to do this. All the instruction I can find online > advises me to install a DHCP server on the same machine that serves > the pxe boot image. But if I do that, I'll get two DHCP servers on > my local network. Is that ok? Will there be a race condition, when a > client asks for an IP address? > > > sv. > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2008 10:48:19 +0300 > From: Manolis Kiagias > Subject: Re: Network, routers, DHCP and PXE > To: Svein Halvor Halvorsen > Cc: questions@freebsd.org > Message-ID: <488D79C3.6070000@gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > Svein Halvor Halvorsen wrote: >> Hi, list! >> >> >> I have a private home network, on an ADSL2+ connection to the >> internet. The home network is behind NAT, all automatically set up >> by the router/dhcp server/wlan access point/adsl modem that I got >> from my ISP. It's a Thomson SpeedTouch 585 router. >> >> Now, on this network, most of the computers get their IP by means of >> DHCP. Except our home audio server, which have a hard coded ip >> address in rc.conf, set to something within the range of the dhcp >> server (10.0.0.2-10.0.0.253). The server seems to pick this up, and >> don't give that address away to someone else. >> > > You may also want to ensure that the router will never allocate your > static IP address to someone else. > Look at the DHCP router settings either for DHCP scope (set it to > narrower values, and use a static IP outside the range) or for something > like exceptions / exclusion where you can mark a specific IP that DHCP > will never assign. >> I've tried using other addresses outside this range, like 10.0.1.1, >> but that doesn't work. All network access is lost when I do that. >> > > 10.0.1.1 is a different network (I assume your netmask is > 255.255.255.0, but check your router or your clients) > >> Now, on my local network I'd like to put a diskless machine. As I >> understand it, my DHCP server needs to tell the client about the >> "filename" and a "next-server" to use. I don't think I can setup the >> Thomson router to do this. All the instruction I can find online >> advises me to install a DHCP server on the same machine that serves >> the pxe boot image. But if I do that, I'll get two DHCP servers on >> my local network. Is that ok? Will there be a race condition, when a >> client asks for an IP address? >> > > You will have to shutdown the router's DHCP. Probably disable it > permanently and assign this function to a machine. > The DHCP of the router also sends you the following information (besides > IP address): > > - DNS Server(s): Either the ones used by your ISP (consult its website) > or its own address (i.e. 10.0.0.1). Most routers send their own address > as a DNS server and perform the resolution by sending your request to > ISP servers. > - Gateway address: This is always the router's local IP address (i.e. > 10.0.0.1) > > If you setup your own DHCP server, make sure it is set to send this info > as well. (These are commonly known as DHCP options) > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2008 09:52:48 +0200 > From: Jan Henrik Sylvester > Subject: Re: Binary upgrade from legacy version + ports > To: Svein Halvor Halvorsen > Cc: questions-list freebsd > Message-ID: <488D7AD0.5090804@janh.de> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > Svein wrote: > > Is there a problem using the prebuilt packages from STABLE on a > > RELEASE box? If I want to run RELEASE, and still use the latest > > packages? The ABI is consistent between STABLE and RELEASE, right? > > Yes, there is a problem. See my posting here: > > http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/2008-June/177553.html > > Unfortunatelly, I have not got an answer, but it is obvious packages > using this new symbol must fail: > > http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-src/2008-May/091586.html > > The question is, if other package may fail as well. > > I have had one more error that went away after recompiling a STABLE > package: > > http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-gnome/2008-July/020520.html > > I do not know if this is related, though. > > If you find out more, please, let me know. > > Cheers, > Jan Henrik > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 6 > Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2008 13:35:55 +0530 > From: Subhro > Subject: Re: Network, routers, DHCP and PXE > To: "Manolis Kiagias" > Cc: Svein Halvor Halvorsen , > questions@freebsd.org > Message-ID: > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > Just to add to that suggestion, if you have a separate DHCP server, > make sure your router works as a DHCP client for the internal network > as well. You should be able to do that by telnetting into the > management port. You may use a serial cable as well. > > This is required in order to get the NAT working properly. > > Thanks > Subhro > > On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 1:18 PM, Manolis Kiagias > wrote: >> Svein Halvor Halvorsen wrote: >>> >>> Hi, list! >>> >>> >>> I have a private home network, on an ADSL2+ connection to the >>> internet. The home network is behind NAT, all automatically set up >>> by the router/dhcp server/wlan access point/adsl modem that I got >>> from my ISP. It's a Thomson SpeedTouch 585 router. >>> >>> Now, on this network, most of the computers get their IP by means of >>> DHCP. Except our home audio server, which have a hard coded ip >>> address in rc.conf, set to something within the range of the dhcp >>> server (10.0.0.2-10.0.0.253). The server seems to pick this up, and >>> don't give that address away to someone else. >>> >> >> You may also want to ensure that the router will never allocate your >> static >> IP address to someone else. >> Look at the DHCP router settings either for DHCP scope (set it to >> narrower >> values, and use a static IP outside the range) or for something like >> exceptions / exclusion where you can mark a specific IP that DHCP will >> never >> assign. >>> >>> I've tried using other addresses outside this range, like 10.0.1.1, >>> but that doesn't work. All network access is lost when I do that. >>> >> >> 10.0.1.1 is a different network (I assume your netmask is 255.255.255.0, >> but >> check your router or your clients) >> >>> Now, on my local network I'd like to put a diskless machine. As I >>> understand it, my DHCP server needs to tell the client about the >>> "filename" and a "next-server" to use. I don't think I can setup the >>> Thomson router to do this. All the instruction I can find online >>> advises me to install a DHCP server on the same machine that serves >>> the pxe boot image. But if I do that, I'll get two DHCP servers on >>> my local network. Is that ok? Will there be a race condition, when a >>> client asks for an IP address? >>> >> >> You will have to shutdown the router's DHCP. Probably disable it >> permanently >> and assign this function to a machine. >> The DHCP of the router also sends you the following information (besides >> IP >> address): >> >> - DNS Server(s): Either the ones used by your ISP (consult its website) >> or >> its own address (i.e. 10.0.0.1). Most routers send their own address as a >> DNS server and perform the resolution by sending your request to ISP >> servers. >> - Gateway address: This is always the router's local IP address (i.e. >> 10.0.0.1) >> >> If you setup your own DHCP server, make sure it is set to send this info >> as >> well. (These are commonly known as DHCP options) >> _______________________________________________ >> freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list >> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions >> To unsubscribe, send any mail to >> "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >> > > > > -- > Subhro Kar > Software Engineer > Dynamic Digital Technologies Pvt. Ltd. > EPY-3, Sector: V > Salt Lake City > 700091 > India > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 7 > Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2008 10:56:47 +0200 > From: Svein Halvor Halvorsen > Subject: Re: Network, routers, DHCP and PXE > To: Manolis Kiagias > Cc: questions@freebsd.org > Message-ID: <488D89CF.1040100@lvor.halvorsen.cc> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > Manolis Kiagias wrote: >>> Now, on this network, most of the computers get their IP by means of >>> DHCP. Except our home audio server, which have a hard coded ip >>> address in rc.conf, set to something within the range of the dhcp >>> server (10.0.0.2-10.0.0.253). The server seems to pick this up, and >>> don't give that address away to someone else. >> >> You may also want to ensure that the router will never allocate your >> static IP address to someone else. >> Look at the DHCP router settings either for DHCP scope (set it to >> narrower values, and use a static IP outside the range) or for something >> like exceptions / exclusion where you can mark a specific IP that DHCP >> will never assign. > > Yeah, but even though the router has customizable values for this >range, and issues a warning when i try to change them, it still > doesn't change them when I click "yes" on the warning. It is > pre-configured to 10.0.0.2-10.0.0.253 > > I could of course use 10.0.0.254 for my static ip, but my room mate > also wants a static address. > >>> I've tried using other addresses outside this range, like 10.0.1.1, >>> but that doesn't work. All network access is lost when I do that. >> >> 10.0.1.1 is a different network (I assume your netmask is >> 255.255.255.0, but check your router or your clients) > > You're right! But how do I make the entire 10/24 adress space > available? It would be "clean" (I guess) to have a different adresse > scheme for the static adresses. > > Anyway, it this point this isn't really critical, as the router > figures out that the addresses I use, are in fact in use, and keeps > them out of its dhcp address pool. > > >> You will have to shutdown the router's DHCP. Probably disable it >> permanently and assign this function to a machine. >> The DHCP of the router also sends you the following information (besides >> IP address): >> >> - DNS Server(s): Either the ones used by your ISP (consult its website) >> or its own address (i.e. 10.0.0.1). Most routers send their own address >> as a DNS server and perform the resolution by sending your request to >> ISP servers. >> - Gateway address: This is always the router's local IP address (i.e. >> 10.0.0.1) >> >> If you setup your own DHCP server, make sure it is set to send this info >> as well. (These are commonly known as DHCP options) > > So as long as I make my own DHCP server act the same way as the > router one, I should be fine? NAT and all will work? > > Is there a way to debug the DHCP response from the current router > dhcp server? So I can see what options it actually sends? dhclient > doesn't seem to have a "more verbose" option, only less. > > > sv. > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 8 > Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2008 12:42:52 +0300 > From: Manolis Kiagias > Subject: Re: Network, routers, DHCP and PXE > To: Svein Halvor Halvorsen > Cc: questions@freebsd.org > Message-ID: <488D949C.5020002@gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > Svein Halvor Halvorsen wrote: >> Manolis Kiagias wrote: >> >>>> Now, on this network, most of the computers get their IP by means of >>>> DHCP. Except our home audio server, which have a hard coded ip >>>> address in rc.conf, set to something within the range of the dhcp >>>> server (10.0.0.2-10.0.0.253). The server seems to pick this up, and >>>> don't give that address away to someone else. >>>> >>> You may also want to ensure that the router will never allocate your >>> static IP address to someone else. >>> Look at the DHCP router settings either for DHCP scope (set it to >>> narrower values, and use a static IP outside the range) or for something >>> like exceptions / exclusion where you can mark a specific IP that DHCP >>> will never assign. >>> >> >> Yeah, but even though the router has customizable values for this >> range, and issues a warning when i try to change them, it still >> doesn't change them when I click "yes" on the warning. It is >> pre-configured to 10.0.0.2-10.0.0.253 >> >> I could of course use 10.0.0.254 for my static ip, but my room mate >> also wants a static address. >> >> > > What are you trying to set it at? I would just lower the 253 value, so I > could use the upper end for my static addresses. If you try to set it to > a subnet outside it's own address, it will definitely not accept it. > I would also try a factory reset or firmware upgrade of the router. I > have been using a Speedtouch 500 series for years, and never had any > problems with settings not getting registered. AFAIR the 585 has one of > the new web interfaces and it is kind of confusing. I found the 500 > easier to use. > >>>> I've tried using other addresses outside this range, like 10.0.1.1, >>>> but that doesn't work. All network access is lost when I do that. >>>> >>> 10.0.1.1 is a different network (I assume your netmask is >>> 255.255.255.0, but check your router or your clients) >>> >> >> You're right! But how do I make the entire 10/24 adress space >> available? It would be "clean" (I guess) to have a different adresse >> scheme for the static adresses. >> > > Well problem is, a netmask of 255.255.255.0 means only the last octet > can be used for hosts. Your DHCP server is already assigning addresses > from this space. > >> Anyway, it this point this isn't really critical, as the router >> figures out that the addresses I use, are in fact in use, and keeps >> them out of its dhcp address pool. >> >> >> >>> You will have to shutdown the router's DHCP. Probably disable it >>> permanently and assign this function to a machine. >>> The DHCP of the router also sends you the following information (besides >>> IP address): >>> >>> - DNS Server(s): Either the ones used by your ISP (consult its website) >>> or its own address (i.e. 10.0.0.1). Most routers send their own address >>> as a DNS server and perform the resolution by sending your request to >>> ISP servers. >>> - Gateway address: This is always the router's local IP address (i.e. >>> 10.0.0.1) >>> >>> If you setup your own DHCP server, make sure it is set to send this info >>> as well. (These are commonly known as DHCP options) >>> >> >> So as long as I make my own DHCP server act the same way as the >> router one, I should be fine? NAT and all will work? >> > > Yes. As long as the clients have a valid DNS to ask, and a valid gateway > to send their packets, everything will work properly. If you come to > think about it, you are already doing this on the system with the static > configuration. > >> Is there a way to debug the DHCP response from the current router >> dhcp server? So I can see what options it actually sends? dhclient >> doesn't seem to have a "more verbose" option, only less. >> >> >> sv. >> > > > Not sure about this, sorry. However, don't expect much more than > IP/Netmask, DNS Server, Gateway from a simple router. These should not > be difficult to configure in isc-dhcp3 (net/isc-dhcp3-server). > > Have a look at this article: > > http://www.howtoforge.com/dhcp_server_linux_debian_sarge > > It is linux oriented, but very easy to adjust for FreeBSD. > You will also need to add: > > option domain-name-servers 10.0.0.1; > > to set the DNS server address to your clients. > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 9 > Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2008 11:59:41 +0200 > From: Svein Halvor Halvorsen > Subject: Re: Network, routers, DHCP and PXE > To: Manolis Kiagias > Cc: questions@freebsd.org > Message-ID: <488D988D.10901@lvor.halvorsen.cc> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > Manolis Kiagias wrote: >>> Yeah, but even though the router has customizable values for this >>> range, and issues a warning when i try to change them, it still >>> doesn't change them when I click "yes" on the warning. It is >>> pre-configured to 10.0.0.2-10.0.0.253 >>> >>> I could of course use 10.0.0.254 for my static ip, but my room mate >>> also wants a static address. >> >> What are you trying to set it at? I would just lower the 253 value, so I >> could use the upper end for my static addresses. If you try to set it to >> a subnet outside it's own address, it will definitely not accept it. > > I managed to change the router ip address to 10.0.0.1/23 and just > keep the default dhcp address space as 10.0.0.2-10.0.0.253. Now I > seem to be able to use 10.0.1.1/24 for my own private use. > > (I don't think I really know what I'm doing here, but it works!) > > >> Well problem is, a netmask of 255.255.255.0 means only the last octet >> can be used for hosts. Your DHCP server is already assigning addresses >> from this space. > > Well, I changed it to 255.255.254.0 (0xfffffe00) but kept the dhcp > range as it was. > > >>> So as long as I make my own DHCP server act the same way as the >>> router one, I should be fine? NAT and all will work? >> >> Yes. As long as the clients have a valid DNS to ask, and a valid gateway >> to send their packets, everything will work properly. If you come to >> think about it, you are already doing this on the system with the static >> configuration. > > Ok, I will look into this. > > Also, looking through the telnet interface options (which are far > more than the web interface gives), I see that I can add "dhch > server option templates", "dhcp server option instances" and that I > can assign such an instance to the "dhcp server pool options". > > This uses a different config scheme than the isc dhcp server config > files, though. And it seems I need to create a template before I can > create an instance. The template takes a name and an option id as > paramters. The instance, then takes a name, a template, and a value > as mandatory paramters. Also enterprice number, suboption number, > and more. > > How does the "filename", "next-server", etc map to option ids? Are > these isomorphic, or do I get this completely wrong? > > Does this make any sense to you, or anyone else here? Should I try > to make the router DHCP server serve the right options, or would you > go the isc dhcp route? > > > Thank you very much for your help so far! > > > sv. > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 10 > Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2008 13:25:39 +0300 > From: Manolis Kiagias > Subject: Re: Network, routers, DHCP and PXE > To: Svein Halvor Halvorsen > Cc: questions@freebsd.org > Message-ID: <488D9EA3.4010503@gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > Svein Halvor Halvorsen wrote: >> Manolis Kiagias wrote: >> >>>> Yeah, but even though the router has customizable values for this >>>> range, and issues a warning when i try to change them, it still >>>> doesn't change them when I click "yes" on the warning. It is >>>> pre-configured to 10.0.0.2-10.0.0.253 >>>> >>>> I could of course use 10.0.0.254 for my static ip, but my room mate >>>> also wants a static address. >>>> >>> What are you trying to set it at? I would just lower the 253 value, so I >>> could use the upper end for my static addresses. If you try to set it to >>> a subnet outside it's own address, it will definitely not accept it. >>> >> >> I managed to change the router ip address to 10.0.0.1/23 and just >> keep the default dhcp address space as 10.0.0.2-10.0.0.253. Now I >> seem to be able to use 10.0.1.1/24 for my own private use. >> >> (I don't think I really know what I'm doing here, but it works!) >> > > Well, a netmask of 255.255.254.0 should give you 10.0.0.1 to 10.0.1.254 > host addresses. > 10.0.1.1 is within range, it should work. >> >> >>> Well problem is, a netmask of 255.255.255.0 means only the last octet >>> can be used for hosts. Your DHCP server is already assigning addresses >>> from this space. >>> >> >> Well, I changed it to 255.255.254.0 (0xfffffe00) but kept the dhcp >> range as it was. >> >> >> > > The DHCP range you are assigning is a subset of what you allowed with > the netmask, thus it is valid. > >>>> So as long as I make my own DHCP server act the same way as the >>>> router one, I should be fine? NAT and all will work? >>>> >>> Yes. As long as the clients have a valid DNS to ask, and a valid gateway >>> to send their packets, everything will work properly. If you come to >>> think about it, you are already doing this on the system with the static >>> configuration. >>> >> >> Ok, I will look into this. >> >> Also, looking through the telnet interface options (which are far >> more than the web interface gives), I see that I can add "dhch >> server option templates", "dhcp server option instances" and that I >> can assign such an instance to the "dhcp server pool options". >> > > Ah, yes completely forgot the speedtouch has a telnet interface as well. > I messed with it a few times myself, mostly for fun ;) > >> This uses a different config scheme than the isc dhcp server config >> files, though. And it seems I need to create a template before I can >> create an instance. The template takes a name and an option id as >> paramters. The instance, then takes a name, a template, and a value >> as mandatory paramters. Also enterprice number, suboption number, >> and more. >> >> How does the "filename", "next-server", etc map to option ids? Are >> these isomorphic, or do I get this completely wrong? >> >> Does this make any sense to you, or anyone else here? Should I try >> to make the router DHCP server serve the right options, or would you >> go the isc dhcp route? >> >> >> Thank you very much for your help so far! >> >> >> sv. >> >> > > > I have only done PXE with Windows servers, and it has been quite some > time - cannot remember the details. > I certainly would not advise you to use the router for this - even if it > is possible it has several drawbacks. > > - You will, sooner or later, change the router and your new one may not > have the capability > - You will spend a probably unreasonable amount of time trying to make > it work - and it may not even succeed > - Learning how to perform this on FreeBSD will help you apply it in many > other situations. > > I would definitely go the isc-dhcp route. > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 11 > Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2008 12:09:16 +0200 > From: "Marcel Grandemange" > Subject: wget vs fetch > To: > Cc: steyn@e-soul.co.za > Message-ID: <000f01c8f09a$002bf610$0083e230$@za.net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > I have a problem with a box I upgraded from FreeBSD 6.2 To FreeBSD7 > > > > It seems the following is happening when I try use portupgrade -a or even > building ports. > > ALL transfers that are FTP fail. > > > > Now to make this simple, I have following environmental variables set.. > > > > http_proxy=http://192.168.12.4:3128/ > > ftp_proxy=http://192.168.12.1:3128/ > > FTP_PASSIVE_MODE=YES > > > > And here is the strange thing.. > > Fetch fails, but if I use wget there is no problem. > > The firewall does allow ftp to go directly aswell, so I have also tried > leaving out any and all proxy settings, this fails aswell. (Except for > wget > once again) > > > > And here is the crux. > > > > I have 5 mahcines on SAME network that has no issues like this, so this > makes me think fetch is broke somehow. > > How can I force FreeBSD to use wget instead of fetch to bypass this? > > > > > > Ive tried setting env FETCH_CMD=wget but that results in wget failing with > msg: > > > > Try `wget --help' for more options. > > => Attempting to fetch from > http://mirror.sg.depaul.edu/pub/security/nmap/. > > wget: invalid option -- > > Usage: wget [OPTION]... [URL]... > > > > > > > > Thankx ahead! > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 12 > Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2008 12:28:27 +0200 > From: "Marcel Grandemange" > Subject: wget vs fetch > To: > Cc: steyn@e-soul.co.za > Message-ID: > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > I have a problem with a box I upgraded from FreeBSD 6.2 To FreeBSD7 > > > > It seems the following is happening when I try use portupgrade -a or even > building ports. > > ALL transfers that are FTP fail. > > > > Now to make this simple, I have following environmental variables set.. > > > > http_proxy=http://192.168.12.4:3128/ > > ftp_proxy=http://192.168.12.1:3128/ > > FTP_PASSIVE_MODE=YES > > > > And here is the strange thing.. > > Fetch fails, but if I use wget there is no problem. > > The firewall does allow ftp to go directly aswell, so I have also tried > leaving out any and all proxy settings, this fails aswell. (Except for > wget > once again) > > > > And here is the crux. > > > > I have 5 mahcines on SAME network that has no issues like this, so this > makes me think fetch is broke somehow. > > How can I force FreeBSD to use wget instead of fetch to bypass this? > > > > > > Ive tried setting env FETCH_CMD=wget but that results in wget failing with > msg: > > > > Try `wget --help' for more options. > > => Attempting to fetch from > http://mirror.sg.depaul.edu/pub/security/nmap/. > > wget: invalid option -- > > Usage: wget [OPTION]... [URL]... > > > > > > > > Thankx ahead! > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 13 > Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2008 13:43:47 +0200 > From: "Marcel Grandemange" > Subject: RE: wget vs fetch > To: "'Sergey Zaharchenko'" > Cc: questions@freebsd.org > Message-ID: <004a01c8f0a7$326df210$9749d630$@za.net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > Thank You, Worked Perfectly! > Saved My Life ;> > > -----Original Message----- > From: Sergey Zaharchenko [mailto:doublef-ctm@yandex.ru] > Sent: Monday, July 28, 2008 12:35 PM > To: Marcel Grandemange > Subject: Re: wget vs fetch > > Hello Marcel! > > Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 12:09:16PM +0200 you wrote: > >> Ive tried setting env FETCH_CMD=wget but that results in wget failing >> with >> msg: >> >> >> >> Try `wget --help' for more options. >> >> => Attempting to fetch from > http://mirror.sg.depaul.edu/pub/security/nmap/. >> >> wget: invalid option -- >> >> Usage: wget [OPTION]... [URL]... > > You might want to add `DISABLE_SIZE=YES' to your /etc/make.conf, as the > fetch's -S option confuses wget. FWIW I use that in connection with > `FETCH_CMD=wget -c --passive-ftp' in make.conf and it has been working for > a > long time for me. > > -- > DoubleF > No virus detected in this message. Ehrm, wait a minute... > /kernel: pid 56921 (antivirus), uid 32000: exited on signal 9 Oh yes, no > virus:) > > > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to > "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > > End of freebsd-questions Digest, Vol 226, Issue 2 > ************************************************* > > __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus > signature database 3302 (20080728) __________ > > The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. > > http://www.eset.com > >