similar to: modules.conf changes in kernel 2.6

Hi All, For my issue, first thanks to ALL, I have some idea of it. Also Thank Peter for his kind remind, I would become one good guy in this list. Most mentioned MTU, but how I assure that the problem is just MTU, how I debug it? Here is my bridge configuration: Internet | | Gateway | | eth0 Ethernet Bridge | eth1 | H u b ( one normal hub

Hi all! I want to assign a physical network card (e100) to a domU: I think Dom0 is ok but domU does not recognize the pci nic. into DomU I don''t know wath should I see: I have nothing in dmesg nor in messages... Into Dom0 I have this modules.conf: options pciback hide=(0000:03: 08.0) install e100 /sbin/modprobe pciback; /sbin/modprobe --ignore-install e100 This is dmesg: pciback

I have a samba server with 2 ethernet ports, one of which is a gigabit port. When connecting from a windows client that has a crossover to the gigabit port, and a crossover to the 100Meg port: If I connect via \\gige.ethernet.address\foo , and copying a large file, windows reports outbound traffic on the gige port and return traffic on the 100Meg port. Thus, it seems the samba server sees the

One of my systems have two onboard NICs which uses the e100 and e1000 drivers (yes, the interfaces are not the same). This system kickstart fine with CentOS 3.x. I recently tried to rekick it with CentOS 4.x but was unsuccessful in doing so. When kicking CentOS 4.1, the interfaces are swapped around, i.e. eth0 becomes eth1 and eth1 becomes eth0 (as described at

For some reason I cannot kickstart via pxe after installing a new SMC 48Port GigE switch. I swapped out an old hub to test and kickstarting still works with the old hub. Does anyone have any suggestions, --

With today''s build, my domain 0 crashes during boot when it tries to bring eth0 up (it''s an E100). cb->prev (eax) is NULL in e100_exec_cb() (e100.c:827). Just from code inspection, I don''t see how this can be. e100_alloc_cbs() was just called, which looks like it should have correctly linked up all the cb->prev/cb->next pointers. It happens regardless of

Yes, I get more than 30MB/s performance. The benchmark I use (NetBench) is essentially CPU bound, such that a faster processor = faster performance. With a very fast hardware config (dual 3.2GHz processors), I've been able to hit around 100MB/s. Changing the RAM or other attributes does not buy me much, it seems that processor power is the bottleneck (at least in my case). When doing your

Hello, I manage a number of servers all running 2.4 (same problem exists with 2.6). My problem is that since a few bridge versions ago, I've had to modify net/bridge/br_fdb.c in the br_fdb_insert() function -- to get rid of the checks that produce this error: Jan 16 10:35:31 host15 kernel: tap_0: received packet with own address as source address Jan 16 10:35:33 host15 kernel: tap_0:

Hi everyone. Has anyone experienced rsync 2.6.0 causing huge amounts of system load? Especially on Linux 2.4? We recently upgraded our "push" machine to rsync 2.6.0 and the next push that went out (rsyncing about 3GB of data to 15 servers sequentially over gigabit ethernet) caused the box to hit 110.59. We only know the load because snmpd was still working, but nothing else in userspace

Hi, I have plug in this USB network device: > Bus 001 Device 002: ID 2001:1a02 D-Link Corp. > T: Bus=01 Lev=01 Prnt=01 Port=04 Cnt=01 Dev#= 2 Spd=480 MxCh= 0 > D: Ver= 2.00 Cls=ff(vend.) Sub=ff Prot=00 MxPS=64 #Cfgs= 1 > P: Vendor=2001 ProdID=1a02 Rev= 0.01 > S: Manufacturer=D-Link > S: Product=DUB-E100 > S: SerialNumber=E5ECEB > C:* #Ifs= 1 Cfg#= 1

Hi! I want to upgrade hardware on my router (iptables, htb, >1000 users). Now it is based on usual desktop PC (Intel Prescott P4 3.00 Ghz, 1 Gb RAM). The reason of hardware upgrade is growing up number of users, also we are planning to increase upstream link from 100 Mbit/s to 1 Gbit/s. Iptables rules are now optimized with ipset tool, for tc I''m using hash tables as well. So I

On 10/11/2016 9:03 PM, Ashish Yadav wrote: > Please test that if both the server are communicating with each other at > 1Gbps or not via "iperf" tool. > > If above gives result of 1Gbps then it will eliminate the NICs problem then > you know that it is a problem with cisco switch only. after they forced the cisco ports to gigE, I was seeing 200-400Mbps in iPerf, which

Hi, Hopefully this won''t be too off-topic (I''ve seen both bonding & vlan mentioned on the list, but not really together). I''ve tried to get bonding (2 x 100Mb EEPro, but will want to try on 1000BaseT) and vlans to work together, but without luck. I can get them working fine (seemingly at least - I didn''t tried bursting on the bonded port) individually.

I've got a pair of identical CentOS 6.7 servers, with SuperMicro X8DTE-F motherboards, these have 2 each Intel 82574L ethernet ports. The eth0 ports are plugged in with 10' runs of brand new cat 5e cable to a Cisco Nexxus 9000 switch (provided by the data center). These servers keep coming up at 100baseT rather than gigE. I've swapped ports and cables with a different server,

I four nodes setup to do active-backup bonding and the drivers loaded for the bonded network interfaces vary between tg3 and e100. All interfaces with the e100 driver loaded report errors much like what you see here: bonding: bond0: link status definitely down for interface eth2, disabling it e100: eth2: e100_watchdog: link up, 100Mbps, full-duplex bonding: bond0: link status definitely up for

Could the problem be that the e100 can do IP receive checksumming on the board, but the eepro driver doesn't enable it. When the board is doing checksum offload, then the csum field isn't set. Please try disabling receive checksumming on the e100 driver modprobe e100 XsumRX=0 If this is the problem, it exists both 2.4 and 2.6. On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 18:24:57 +0200 Hannes Schulz

Hi, I am looking for dual or quad fast ethernet NICs that work with CentOS. There is no need for high performance so regular fast/pci is ok. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20101228/1f5e2944/attachment-0001.html>

>From: "Shawn Wright" <swright@sls.bc.ca> >Subject: [Shorewall-users] Finally making some progress >I *think* we are finally making some progress in tracking our elusive >performance problems. After employing a second 10Mb link from our ISP, >along with another firewall box and proxy, we were able to determine the >problem *is* our firewall. We don''t

Hi there, When Lustre is configured in an environment where there are multiple paths to the same destination of the same length (i.e. two paths, each one hop away), which path(s) will be used for sending and receiving data? I have my cluster configured with two OSTs with two GigE NICs in each. I am seeing identical performance metrics when I use LACP to aggregate, and when I use two separate

I''ve locked up my dom0 a couple of times this morning copying a 3GB file from local disk to an NFS mount(neither xend nor guests running). I don''t encounter this problem on the stock CentOS 4 kernel. The machine is a PowerEdge 2850 with 2 e1000 cards - the one in use is connected to a PowerConnect 2216 10/100 switch and has negotiated 100Mbit. I''ll check if the stock