Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 8 Jul 2003 20:10:48 -0500
From:      "Vasudevan, Swaminathan (PNB Roseville)" <swaminathan.vasudevan@hp.com>
To:        <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>
Subject:   How can I write a test application for the Network Drivers in FreeBSD
Message-ID:  <702A044A49E1764B8BAEE8C0AE76A578066F2B2C@cceexc19.americas.cpqcorp.net>

next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi,
Could any one give an example of writing applications for testing the =
Network Drivers in FreeBSD.

Thanks
Swami

-----Original Message-----
From: freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org =
[mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org]=20
Sent: Tuesday, July 08, 2003 12:01 PM
To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Subject: freebsd-net Digest, Vol 16, Issue 2


Send freebsd-net mailing list submissions to
	freebsd-net@freebsd.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
	http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
	freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
	freebsd-net-owner@freebsd.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than =
"Re: Contents of freebsd-net digest..."


Today's Topics:

   1. Re: Request for Review: bin/54151 (Bruce M Simpson)
   2. Re: ipprecedence (Bruce M Simpson)
   3. QoS/device API (was Re: ipprecedence) (Luigi Rizzo)
   4. Acess to virtual hosts are being blocked by natd/firewall
      (Guilherme Oliveira)
   5. network device (diego maradona)
   6. Re: Acess to virtual hosts are being blocked by natd/firewall
      (Guilherme Oliveira)
   7. AODV RFC is now ratified (Bruce M Simpson)
   8. RE: Acess to virtual hosts are being blocked by natd/firewall
      (Sten Daniel S?rsdal)
   9. Re: Acess to virtual hosts are being blocked by natd/firewall
      (Guilherme Oliveira)
  10. RE: Acess to virtual hosts are being blocked by natd/firewall
      (Sten Daniel S?rsdal)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2003 21:08:05 +0100
From: Bruce M Simpson <bms@spc.org>
Subject: Re: Request for Review: bin/54151
To: Dmitry Morozovsky <marck@rinet.ru>
Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Message-ID: <20030707200805.GF32325@spc.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Dus-ascii

On Sun, Jul 06, 2003 at 09:33:11PM +0400, Dmitry Morozovsky wrote:
> Dear colleagues,
>=20
> would you please spend a bit of your time to review=20
> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=3Dbin/54151
> [patch to add -i option to arp(8)]?

I think this sort of thing is badly needed, especially for the =
router/VLAN scenarios which you envisage.

However, one thing which has always bothered me is the message:
	arp: actual retrieval of routing table

I've seen this when the arp table is in an undefined state, i.e. empty, =
it could be more helpfully worded.

BMS

------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2003 21:12:47 +0100
From: Bruce M Simpson <bms@spc.org>
Subject: Re: ipprecedence
To: Luigi Rizzo <rizzo@icir.org>
Cc: Eugene Grosbein <eugen@grosbein.pp.ru>
Message-ID: <20030707201247.GG32325@spc.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Dus-ascii

On Sat, Jul 05, 2003 at 12:33:32PM -0700, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
> permit. Certain hardware even has multiple, prioritized transmit=20
> rings, but there is no support for them in our drivers (basically we=20
> don't have an API for that).

One example which immediately springs to mind is the RTL8139C+ which =
Bill Paul has been playing with this very week.

Also, my Efficient Networks Lanai based ATM adapter has support of kinds =
for this (albeit in ATM-land), even the fxp has Intel's proprietary =
Priority Packet software for it (pardon the pun).

With the increased interest in VoIP and similar these days, perhaps =
hardware DS/QoS support of this nature is something the project should =
explore?

I have heard the 'provision your network correctly' argument against =
this, but this doesn't address the problem of pushing isochronous =
traffic through a narrow pipe used to connect a branch office, so I find =
it unhelpful.

BMS

------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2003 02:09:27 -0700
From: Luigi Rizzo <rizzo@icir.org>
Subject: QoS/device API (was Re: ipprecedence)
To: Bruce M Simpson <bms@spc.org>
Cc: Eugene Grosbein <eugen@kuzbass.ru>
Message-ID: <20030708020927.A89198@xorpc.icir.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Dus-ascii

On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 09:12:47PM +0100, Bruce M Simpson wrote: ...
> With the increased interest in VoIP and similar these days, perhaps=20
> hardware DS/QoS support of this nature is something the project should =

> explore?

the usual problem here is that if you want your mechanisms to be useful, =
you should implement them in software first (even though it has a =
performance impact), and then exploit the hw capabilities when/if they =
are present and useful (e.g. on a slow link and fast CPU, you don't care =
too much about separate hw queues).

The 'if_tx_rdy' dummynet trick that i mentioned does cover the software =
part, and i believe it can be made reasonably cheap (i.e. skip the =
function call if no pipes are registered to be clocked by that =
interface) so that it will not harm performance in the general case.

If there is interest, i can look into doing this change and adding this =
call to our device drivers.

	cheers
	luigi

------------------------------

Message: 4
Date: Tue, 08 Jul 2003 12:45:17 +0100
From: Guilherme Oliveira <guilherme@nortenet.pt>
Subject: Acess to virtual hosts are being blocked by natd/firewall
To: FreeBSD-NET@FreeBSD.ORG
Message-ID: <3F0AAECD.4070601@nortenet.pt>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Dus-ascii; format=3Dflowed

Hi !

I've configured a dmz and our workstations (192.168.0) acess to external =

sites very well.

But sites that are hosted in 192.168.1 that are port_redirected by natd=20
with static ip are blocked only if acessed by our workstations with=20
192.168.0
 From internet is fine.

It blocks www.site-example.com and xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx.
It only works with 192.168.1.2 !

/kernel: Connection attempt to TCP xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx:80 from =
192.168.0.3:2366

My natd it's configured with
natd_flags=3D"-l -s -m -u -dynamic -log_denied -log_ipfw_denied=20
-redirect_port tcp 192.168.1.2:80 xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx:80"

The firewall is configured to "OPEN".

netstat -r in natd:
default            adsl-b3-72-1.telep UGSc        2     4300   tun0
localhost          localhost          UH          0        0    lo0
192.168.0          link#2             UC          5        0    xl1
192.168.0.2        00:e0:7d:ed:1b:de  UHLW        0       38    xl1    =
940
192.168.0.3        00:50:eb:1d:80:dd  UHLW        1      379    xl1    =
657
192.168.0.5        00:08:02:cf:1b:6d  UHLW        0     1262    xl1    =
349
192.168.0.6        00:c0:df:09:a1:31  UHLW        0       24    xl1    =
560
192.168.0.7        00:c0:df:09:ab:e7  UHLW        0      977    xl1    =
521
192.168.1          link#3             UC          1        0    xl2
192.168.1.2        00:04:75:e9:c0:04  UHLW        1      257    xl2    =
331
adsl-b3-72-1.telep adslemp-b3-123-140 UH          2        0   tun0
adslemp-b3-121-73. link#1             UC          0        0    xl0
adslemp-b3-121-74. link#1             UC          0        0    xl0
adslemp-b3-121-75. link#1             UC          0        0    xl0
adslemp-b3-121-76. link#1             UC          0        0    xl0
adslemp-b3-121-77. link#1             UC          0        0    xl0
adslemp-b3-121-78. link#1             UC          0        0    xl0


netstat -r in workstation:
Internet:
Destination        Gateway            Flags    Refs      Use  Netif =
Expire
default            sarpa              UGSc       10        0   sis0
localhost          localhost          UH          0      140    lo0
192.168.0          link#1             UC          2        0   sis0
sarpa              00:04:75:e0:d4:52  UHLW       12    12204   sis0    =
596
parpa              00:50:eb:1d:80:dd  UHLW        0       39    lo0



It's natd problem or ipfw ?


------------------------------

Message: 5
Date: Tue, 08 Jul 2003 14:57:22 +0200
From: "diego maradona" <yqyq22@hotmail.com>
Subject: network device
To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Message-ID: <Law11-F80rQuDhO29nI00029b25@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Diso-8859-1; format=3Dflowed

Dear all,
There is a way to install a 2 network device with fault=20
tolerance(active-standby) or with load-balancing( virtual ip address)? =
thanks in advance yqyq22

_________________________________________________________________
MSN Extra Storage: piena libert=E0 di esprimersi e comunicare =20
http://www.msn.it/msnservizi/es/?xAPID=3D534&DI=3D1044&SU=3Dhttp://hotmai=
l.it/&HL=3DHMTAGTX_MSN_Extra_Storage


------------------------------

Message: 6
Date: Tue, 08 Jul 2003 14:37:30 +0100
From: Guilherme Oliveira <guilherme@nortenet.pt>
Subject: Re: Acess to virtual hosts are being blocked by natd/firewall
To: FreeBSD-NET <FreeBSD-NET@FreeBSD.ORG>
Message-ID: <3F0AC91A.9000502@nortenet.pt>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Dus-ascii; format=3Dflowed

I've done that but it's not working.

It's strange because if I ping www.site-example.com it goes to the right =

static ip.
So it's pinging the right server.

It could be apache configs but it happens also in qmail, ...

I think it's natd but don't know how ...


------------------------------

Message: 7
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2003 15:32:35 +0100
From: Bruce M Simpson <bms@spc.org>
Subject: AODV RFC is now ratified
To: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com>
Cc: sam@errno.com
Message-ID: <20030708143235.GK22331@spc.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Dus-ascii

On Tue, Jul 08, 2003 at 08:13:03AM -0600, M. Warner Losh wrote:
> Cool!  Hopefully this work will include fixing lucent cards too :-)

Hail Eris. All hail Discordia.

By the way, have you seen RFC 3561? It's just out.

http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc3561.html
Ad hoc On-Demand Distance Vector (AODV) Routing

I'm putting together a brief FreeBSD HOWTO -- 'On-demand Routing with =
XRESOLVE for Dummies' -- hinted at by fenestro. My technique is quite =
simple, I create a CLONE+XRESOLVE route pointing to disc0 (to avoid =
routing loops when ip forwarding is enabled) for the route(s) intended =
to use the wireless cloud as a next-hop, then listen for RTM_RESOLVE =
messages when the stack tries to use those route entries to clone routes =
from. That then enables our hypothetical aodvd to issue RTM_CHANGE to =
route the data to its peer. Seems pretty clean.

We can of course tweak the net.inet.ip.rt* cache tunables to prevent the =
stack getting swamped with stale wireless routes.

I may not be able to get AODV all done on my own, but I may have a crack =
at it - have a lot on my plate just now.

BMS

------------------------------

Message: 8
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2003 16:57:05 +0200
From: Sten Daniel S?rsdal<sten.daniel.sorsdal@wan.no>
Subject: RE: Acess to virtual hosts are being blocked by natd/firewall
To: "Guilherme Oliveira" <guilherme@nortenet.pt>,	"FreeBSD-NET"
	<FreeBSD-NET@FreeBSD.ORG>
Message-ID:
	<0AF1BBDF1218F14E9B4CCE414744E70F07DEE4@exchange.wanglobal.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;	charset=3D"iso-8859-1"

>=20
> I've done that but it's not working.
>=20
> It's strange because if I ping www.site-example.com it goes
> to the right=20
> static ip.
> So it's pinging the right server.
>=20
> It could be apache configs but it happens also in qmail, ...
>=20
> I think it's natd but don't know how ...
>=20

Make sure that you are diverting the traffic from LAN to DMZ via NATD.

- Sten

------------------------------

Message: 9
Date: Tue, 08 Jul 2003 16:22:10 +0100
From: Guilherme Oliveira <guilherme@nortenet.pt>
Subject: Re: Acess to virtual hosts are being blocked by natd/firewall
To: FreeBSD-NET <FreeBSD-NET@FreeBSD.ORG>,
	<sten.daniel.sorsdal@wan.no>
Message-ID: <3F0AE1A2.9080100@nortenet.pt>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3DISO-8859-1; format=3Dflowed

Sten Daniel S=F8rsdal wrote:
> Make sure that you are diverting the traffic from LAN to DMZ via NATD.

I didn'tunderstand very well:
ipfw is not doing this thrue the "OPEN" configuration by default ?


------------------------------

Message: 10
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2003 17:57:10 +0200
From: Sten Daniel S?rsdal<sten.daniel.sorsdal@wan.no>
Subject: RE: Acess to virtual hosts are being blocked by natd/firewall
To: "Guilherme Oliveira" <guilherme@nortenet.pt>,	"FreeBSD-NET"
	<FreeBSD-NET@FreeBSD.ORG>
Message-ID:
	<0AF1BBDF1218F14E9B4CCE414744E70F07DEE6@exchange.wanglobal.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;	charset=3D"iso-8859-1"

> Sten Daniel S=F8rsdal wrote:
> > Make sure that you are diverting the traffic from LAN to
> DMZ via NATD.
>=20
> I didn'tunderstand very well:
> ipfw is not doing this thrue the "OPEN" configuration by default ?
>=20

No.

in rc.firewall (line 124):
${fwcmd} add 50 divert natd all from any to any via ${natd_interface}

This line only NAT's traffic going in and out of your upstream =
interface.

in "OPEN" configuration it NATs the traffic from LAN and DMZ -to/from- =
internet. Not between the LAN and DMZ area, which is what you need.

You could look into setting up your own little proxy DNS (such as =
pdnsd). Add the servers to hosts file on your workstations, or make it =
NAT the way you want.


- Sten



------------------------------

_______________________________________________
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list =
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"

End of freebsd-net Digest, Vol 16, Issue 2
******************************************



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?702A044A49E1764B8BAEE8C0AE76A578066F2B2C>