From owner-freebsd-questions Sun Feb 4 20: 5:32 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from tomts7-srv.bellnexxia.net (tomts7.bellnexxia.net [209.226.175.40]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 497EB37B401 for ; Sun, 4 Feb 2001 20:05:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from johnny2k ([64.229.39.50]) by tomts7-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.4.01.03.00 201-229-121) with SMTP id <20010205040512.KWKX6682.tomts7-srv.bellnexxia.net@johnny2k>; Sun, 4 Feb 2001 23:05:12 -0500 Message-ID: <002b01c08f28$e7e93ca0$3227e540@johnny2k> From: "John Telford" To: "Rogier R. Mulhuijzen" Cc: References: <4.3.2.7.0.20010205025924.00bd59a0@mail.drwilco.net> Subject: Re: Firewalling a PPPoE, any easy workaround to MTU on lan stations? Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2001 23:05:41 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6700 Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG The system will be firewalling one of our smaller divisions, 6 Win9X PC's and backup to theire Mac production ISP connection. Unfourtunatley they signed up for a pppoe type provider, probably to save $. I normally install -release for our other sites, they have a mix of cable, adsl, isdn all with fixed IP #'s or cable dhcp. Pretty easy stuff, this is the first pppoe type, luckly I have the same pppoe provider at home so I've got the box here to set up. Since the site is 2.5 -3 hour drive away I want to make sure I've covered everything (or all that I can) before taking the box out there. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rogier R. Mulhuijzen" To: "John Telford" Cc: Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2001 9:07 PM Subject: Re: Firewalling a PPPoE, any easy workaround to MTU on lan stations? > I'm still new to FreeBSD development, and not an authorative source for > answers, but let me try to answer anyway =) I've been playing with FreeBSD for a year and still feel like such a newbie. Every box I do something new crops up that sends me back to the man pages and mailing lists. > > At 21:53 4-2-01 -0500, John Telford wrote: > >Hmm my timing for this topic seems right on :) > >Since I ran out of disk space trying to update to -stable this afternoon > >(now that's another topic for another day "Why so much space to keep up > >with -stable, when /stand/sysinstall can do an inplace update ?") > > Because you're using source. Read the keeping -stable and -current part of > the FAQ/handbook to determine if you want to or not. Yep, refreshed it this aft and this site could go -stable but not -current I feel. > > If I'm not mistaken there are also snapshots of either you can install like > a normal release... I will check that out. > > >So should a throw another drive in this thing and go -stable or not ? > > If you're up to it. Remember -current is a development version and will > break often and perform poorly a lot of the time. -stable should be a lot > better but things might break unexpectedly. If you're running a non-vital > server you can run -stable to help us find minor things that are wrong. > > If you're running a vital server stick to -RELEASE because that's basically > -STABLE after a feature freeze and a code freeze (to allow for some heavy > testing and bugfixes only). > > Personally I run -CURRENT on my laptop, -STABLE on my home gateway box and > -RELEASE on servers at work. > > >What does MFC'd mean ? > > Merged From Current. Something is developed under -CURRENT and then merged > back into -STABLE (usually) > > Hope that answers your questions. Just to clear up, Does the tcpmss option exist in 4.2 -STABLE or not ? > Thanks, John. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message