From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue Jan 28 06:03:35 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id GAA15141 for hackers-outgoing; Tue, 28 Jan 1997 06:03:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from buffnet4.buffnet.net (root@buffnet4.buffnet.net [205.246.19.13]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id GAA15131; Tue, 28 Jan 1997 06:03:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from buffnet1.buffnet.net (mmdf@buffnet1.buffnet.net [205.246.19.10]) by buffnet4.buffnet.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id IAA04331; Tue, 28 Jan 1997 08:45:49 -0500 Received: from buffnet11.buffnet.net by buffnet1.buffnet.net id aa13578; 28 Jan 97 9:03 EST Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 09:03:16 -0500 (EST) From: Steve To: Robert Chalmers cc: bsd , FreeBSD ISP , hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: progress report on connection problems In-Reply-To: <199701281002.UAA00874@nanguo.chalmers.com.au> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > > The only constant is the Annex. However, why does it pass _most_ traffic, > if it is the fault of the Annex, and only fail on some.? > > If FreeBSD is > going to be so fussy about its tcp/ip flow, shouldn't it be reworked. > The world is still full of less than leading edge hardware! Some of it > brand new... I had similar problems using annexes as term servers with user - and have posted numerous times that this problem only exists with freebsd - sco, linux, etc doesnt have trouble - only every time I post it I get bashed about the head and lectured on freebsd having perfect tcp/ip and everything else in the world having faulty tcp/ip. So good luck to you sir!