From owner-freebsd-atm Tue Feb 29 18:13:38 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-atm@freebsd.org Received: from kinkajou.arc.nasa.gov (kinkajou.arc.nasa.gov [128.102.132.150]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA23237B76D for ; Tue, 29 Feb 2000 18:13:34 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from lamaster@nren.nasa.gov) Received: from localhost (lamaster@localhost) by kinkajou.arc.nasa.gov (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.1) with ESMTP id SAA04357; Tue, 29 Feb 2000 18:13:17 -0800 (PST) X-Authentication-Warning: kinkajou.arc.nasa.gov: lamaster owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 18:13:17 -0800 (PST) From: Hugh LaMaster X-Sender: lamaster@kinkajou.arc.nasa.gov To: Hirofumi ABE Cc: Kenjiro Cho , freebsd-atm@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Traffic shaping on HARP In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.J.20000225124047.031acb10@imi.m.ecl.ntt.co.jp> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-atm@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Fri, 25 Feb 2000, Hirofumi ABE wrote: > Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2000 12:56:46 +0900 > From: Hirofumi ABE > To: Kenjiro Cho , freebsd-atm@FreeBSD.ORG > Cc: abe.hirofumi@lab.ntt.co.jp > Subject: Re: Traffic shaping on HARP > > At 20:51 00/02/24 +0900, Kenjiro Cho wrote: > > >Hirofumi ABE wrote: > > > I confirmed BSD box using en drivers can be connected through cisco4000. > > > This works very well when we use ping, telnet and http, but only ftp-data > > > doesn't. > > > The cisco seems to discard the data. > > > Why only ftp-data cause? > > > >Path MTU discovery? > > Thanks, I avoided the problem. > I can't decide which box is wrong BSD or cisco, but the MTU size of 9180 > seems to have some problems. Cisco ATM MTU is 4470 by default; if you want 9180 you have to state it explicitly. I believe that setting it to 9180 can exacerbate problems with fast SRAM buffer exhaustion on some configurations with lots of subinterfaces. POS also defaults to 4470, though I believe that it can be set higher, also to 9180, and the Cisco GigabitEthernet max MTU on some new interfaces is 4470 (1500 on others), so, it seems that 4470 is kind of a Cisco "standard". Do you need 9180 for a particular reason or would 4470 do? (I think 9180 might be the Fore ATM default? Does 9180 show up in an RFC somewhere?) > Current configuration is following.. > > [Sender BSD] > ifconfig en0 inet 192.168.10.20 netmask 255.255.255.0 mtu 1500 up > route add -iface cisco64 -link en0:3.0.0.40 > pvctxctl en0 64 -p 6975 > route add -net 192.168.65.0 -gateway cisco64 > > [Cisco] > enable > conf t > interface atm 0.5 point-to-point mtu 9180 > ip address 192.168.10.1 255.255.255.0 > atm pvc 64 0 64 aal5snap 3000 3000 3000 inarp > exit > interface atm 0.6 point-to-point > ip address 192.168.65.1 255.255.255.0 > atm pvc 64 0 64 aal5snap 3000 3000 3000 inarp > exit > disable > > [Receiver BSD] > ifconfig en0 inet 192.168.65.72 netmask 255.255.255.0 mtu 1500 up > route add -iface cisco65 -link en0:3.0.0.41 > pvctxctl en0 65 -p 6975 > route add -net 192.168.10.0 -gateway cisco65 > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-atm" in the body of the message > -- Hugh LaMaster, M/S 233-21, Email: lamaster@nren.nasa.gov NASA Ames Research Center Or: lamaster@nas.nasa.gov Moffett Field, CA 94035-1000 Or: lamaster@george.arc.nasa.gov Phone: 650/604-1056 Disc: Unofficial, personal *opinion*. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-atm" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-atm Wed Mar 1 10:56: 0 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-atm@freebsd.org Received: from aero.org (aero.org [130.221.16.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D27937BC3E for ; Wed, 1 Mar 2000 10:55:55 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from scottm@aero.org) Received: by aero.org id <17204-1>; Wed, 1 Mar 2000 10:55:23 -0800 Received: from rushe.aero.org(130.221.201.83) via SMTP by aero.org, id smtpdAAAa24623; Wed Mar 1 10:54:55 2000 Received: from aero.org (rdwarrior.aero.org [130.221.202.71]) by rushe.aero.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA01875; Wed, 1 Mar 2000 10:54:54 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <38BD67A8.B805C672@aero.org> From: Scott Michel Reply-To: scottm@cs.ucla.edu Organization: UCLA Computer Chaos X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en]C-CCK-MCD {Sony} (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Hugh LaMaster Cc: Hirofumi ABE , Kenjiro Cho , freebsd-atm@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Traffic shaping on HARP References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 10:55:05 -0800 Sender: owner-freebsd-atm@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Hugh LaMaster wrote: > Cisco ATM MTU is 4470 by default; if you want 9180 you have > to state it explicitly. I believe that setting it to 9180 > can exacerbate problems with fast SRAM buffer exhaustion on > some configurations with lots of subinterfaces. POS also > defaults to 4470, though I believe that it can be set higher, > also to 9180, and the Cisco GigabitEthernet max MTU on some > new interfaces is 4470 (1500 on others), so, it seems that 4470 > is kind of a Cisco "standard". Do you need 9180 for a particular > reason or would 4470 do? (I think 9180 might be the Fore ATM > default? Does 9180 show up in an RFC somewhere?) 9180 is kinda weird anyway when dealing with Sparc/Solaris boxes, since it's an odd multiple of the h/w page size. Causes strange effects in the Solaris kernel memory manager, at least on 2.5 and 2.6. Not that 4470 is much better either for the x86 or Sparc. So setting MUT to something that resembles your platform's page size is something I highly recommend. Yes, it's extra twiddling, but hey, this is ATM we're talking about -- you're already taking a network mgmt hit to maintain two infrastructures. -scooter To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-atm" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-atm Wed Mar 1 12: 6:45 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-atm@freebsd.org Received: from marcos.networkcs.com (marcos.networkcs.com [137.66.16.1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4179B37B7DB for ; Wed, 1 Mar 2000 12:06:34 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from mks@us.networkcs.com) Received: from us.networkcs.com (us.networkcs.com [137.66.11.15]) by marcos.networkcs.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA23760; Wed, 1 Mar 2000 14:06:29 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from mks@us.networkcs.com) Received: (from mks@localhost) by us.networkcs.com (8.9.2/8.9.2) id OAA95134; Wed, 1 Mar 2000 14:06:28 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from mks) From: Mike Spengler Message-Id: <200003012006.OAA95134@us.networkcs.com> Subject: Re: Traffic shaping on HARP To: lamaster@nren.nasa.gov (Hugh LaMaster) Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 14:06:28 -0600 (CST) Cc: abe.hirofumi@lab.ntt.co.jp (Hirofumi ABE), kjc@csl.sony.co.jp (Kenjiro Cho), freebsd-atm@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: from "Hugh LaMaster" at Feb 29, 2000 06:13:17 PM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL2] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-atm@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Hugh LaMaster claims: > > > I can't decide which box is wrong BSD or cisco, but the MTU size of 9180 > > seems to have some problems. > > Cisco ATM MTU is 4470 by default; if you want 9180 you have > to state it explicitly. I believe that setting it to 9180 > can exacerbate problems with fast SRAM buffer exhaustion on > some configurations with lots of subinterfaces. POS also > defaults to 4470, though I believe that it can be set higher, > also to 9180, and the Cisco GigabitEthernet max MTU on some > new interfaces is 4470 (1500 on others), so, it seems that 4470 > is kind of a Cisco "standard". Do you need 9180 for a particular > reason or would 4470 do? (I think 9180 might be the Fore ATM > default? Does 9180 show up in an RFC somewhere?) > Yes. See RFC 2225, Section 7. -- Mike Spengler Network Computing Services, Inc. Email: mks@networkcs.com 1200 Washington Ave. So. Phone: +1 612 337 3557 Minneapolis MN 55415 FAX: +1 612 337 3400 (aka Minnesota Supercomputer Center) To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-atm" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-atm Wed Mar 1 13: 6:31 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-atm@freebsd.org Received: from kinkajou.arc.nasa.gov (kinkajou.arc.nasa.gov [128.102.132.150]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7A1737B843 for ; Wed, 1 Mar 2000 13:06:23 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from lamaster@nren.nasa.gov) Received: from localhost (lamaster@localhost) by kinkajou.arc.nasa.gov (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAA09538; Wed, 1 Mar 2000 13:06:01 -0800 (PST) X-Authentication-Warning: kinkajou.arc.nasa.gov: lamaster owned process doing -bs Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 13:06:01 -0800 (PST) From: Hugh LaMaster X-Sender: lamaster@kinkajou.arc.nasa.gov To: Hugh LaMaster Cc: Mike Spengler , Hirofumi ABE , Kenjiro Cho , freebsd-atm@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Traffic shaping on HARP In-Reply-To: <200003012006.OAA95134@us.networkcs.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-atm@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Wed, 1 Mar 2000, Mike Spengler wrote: > Hugh LaMaster claims: > > > > > I can't decide which box is wrong BSD or cisco, but the MTU size of 9180 > > > seems to have some problems. > > > > Cisco ATM MTU is 4470 by default; if you want 9180 you have : > > default? Does 9180 show up in an RFC somewhere?) > > > Yes. See RFC 2225, Section 7. Thanks. It is there. The way it is worded, I can see either interpretation: that the default should always be 9180, or, only that that 9180 has to be supported. Regardless, lots of networks are set at 4470, so, pragmatically, 4470 is probably a good compromise. How much performance difference do you see between 4470 and 9180? -- Hugh LaMaster, M/S 233-21, Email: lamaster@nren.nasa.gov NASA Ames Research Center Or: lamaster@nas.nasa.gov Moffett Field, CA 94035-1000 Or: lamaster@george.arc.nasa.gov Phone: 650/604-1056 Disc: Unofficial, personal *opinion*. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-atm" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-atm Thu Mar 2 20:31:14 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-atm@freebsd.org Received: from cad.arl.mil (cad.arl.mil [128.63.247.128]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 35D7B37B59C for ; Thu, 2 Mar 2000 20:31:12 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from mike@ARL.MIL) Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 23:27:31 EST From: Mike Muuss To: freebsd-atm@freebsd.org Subject: OC-12 for FreeBSD? Message-ID: <200003022327.aa4602424@CAD.ARL.MIL> Sender: owner-freebsd-atm@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Dear FreeBSD ATM community - Does anyone have working drivers (or programming documentation) for the Fore/Marconi HE-622 PCI board? This is their OC-12 rate PCI card. I have several HE-622 boards operating in SGI machines running IRIX 6.4 and 6.5, and would like to put one in a FreeBSD machine. Any leads? Alternatively, are their drivers for OC-12 boards with drivers available from another vendor? Thanks! -Mike Muuss Senior Scientist The U.S. Army Research Laboratory APG, MD 21005-5068 USA My E-mail is My World-Wide-Web URL is http://ftp.arl.mil/~mike/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-atm" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-atm Fri Mar 3 11: 3:53 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-atm@freebsd.org Received: from portnoy.lbl.gov (portnoy.lbl.gov [131.243.2.11]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CCF937B717 for ; Fri, 3 Mar 2000 11:03:51 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from jin@portnoy.lbl.gov) Received: (from jin@localhost) by george.lbl.gov () id LAA03492; Fri, 3 Mar 2000 11:03:50 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2000 11:03:50 -0800 (PST) From: Jin Guojun (FTG staff) Message-Id: <200003031903.LAA03492@george.lbl.gov> To: freebsd-atm@FreeBSD.ORG, mike@ARL.MIL Subject: Re: OC-12 for FreeBSD? Sender: owner-freebsd-atm@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org I have the driver, ATM CORE layer, UNI ported to FreeBSD. I am working on the ATM/IP 1577 and the glue to put them toghther right now. Also, I need to get agreement from Fore/Marconi to release the object code. It probably will take a month or so. -Jin > Dear FreeBSD ATM community - > > Does anyone have working drivers (or programming documentation) for the > Fore/Marconi HE-622 PCI board? This is their OC-12 rate PCI card. > > I have several HE-622 boards operating in SGI machines running IRIX 6.4 > and 6.5, and would like to put one in a FreeBSD machine. Any leads? > > Alternatively, are their drivers for OC-12 boards with drivers available > from another vendor? > > Thanks! > -Mike Muuss > > Senior Scientist > The U.S. Army Research Laboratory > APG, MD 21005-5068 USA > > My E-mail is > My World-Wide-Web URL is http://ftp.arl.mil/~mike/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-atm" in the body of the message