similar to: [Bug 1427] New: can not reuse source port to a DNATed IP if it is being used by another connection

The current way of handling refcounting in the DP MST helpers is really confusing and probably just plain wrong because it's been hacked up many times over the years without anyone actually going over the code and seeing if things could be simplified. To the best of my understanding, the current scheme works like this: drm_dp_mst_port and drm_dp_mst_branch both have a single refcount. When

The current way of handling refcounting in the DP MST helpers is really confusing and probably just plain wrong because it's been hacked up many times over the years without anyone actually going over the code and seeing if things could be simplified. To the best of my understanding, the current scheme works like this: drm_dp_mst_port and drm_dp_mst_branch both have a single refcount. When

The current way of handling refcounting in the DP MST helpers is really confusing and probably just plain wrong because it's been hacked up many times over the years without anyone actually going over the code and seeing if things could be simplified. To the best of my understanding, the current scheme works like this: drm_dp_mst_port and drm_dp_mst_branch both have a single refcount. When

On Fri, 2018-12-14 at 10:29 +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 08:25:32PM -0500, Lyude Paul wrote: > > The current way of handling refcounting in the DP MST helpers is really > > confusing and probably just plain wrong because it's been hacked up many > > times over the years without anyone actually going over the code and > > seeing if things

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1742 Bug ID: 1742 Summary: using nfqueue breaks SCTP connection (tracking) Product: libnetfilter_queue Version: unspecified Hardware: All OS: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component: libnetfilter_queue Assignee:

On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 04:27:58PM -0500, Lyude Paul wrote: > On Fri, 2018-12-14 at 10:29 +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 08:25:32PM -0500, Lyude Paul wrote: > > > The current way of handling refcounting in the DP MST helpers is really > > > confusing and probably just plain wrong because it's been hacked up many > > > times over the

continuing discussions of 79xx issues. i've seen referenced and am experiencing difficulty getting a 7970 to work behind NAT to a public asterisk server. i am successful with 7960s. 1. SIP load is 70.8-3-3SR2S 2. config works fine if 7970 is connecting to an asterisk server a local LAN (same subnet) 3. when debugging it in a NAT'd environment I see the register and

On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 08:25:32PM -0500, Lyude Paul wrote: > The current way of handling refcounting in the DP MST helpers is really > confusing and probably just plain wrong because it's been hacked up many > times over the years without anyone actually going over the code and > seeing if things could be simplified. > > To the best of my understanding, the current scheme

I hope someone can enlighten me. I have a quad-port Intel 82580 nic (igb driver) on my system and I''d like to dedicate each nic to a HVM via VT-d PCI passthrough. The IOMMU on my system seems to work, I can assign the PCI devices to my HVMs. The HVMs see the pci device and load their respective igb drivers, and ethtool -i eth0 works on each HVM, shows the drivers are loaded and the

Here''s my situation: I''ve got an Intel machine running a 2.6.9 linux kernel and this box has 4 modems attached to it via a usb to serial port expander. In order to force data down each of the modems, some pretty simple rules are used and they are as follows: iptables -t mangle -A OUTPUT -p tcp --dport $PORT1 -j MARK --set-mark 1 iptables -t mangle -A OUTPUT -p tcp --dport

FYI: I hope that this is not a "me" error and that Digium can squash this bug (or new hardware fixes it). Either way, when this is over, perhaps I can provide some troubleshooting documentation for these errors. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2005 09:36:51 -0500 (EST) From: Andrew McRory <amcrory@linuxsys.com> To: support@digium.com Subject: PRI Errors

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1476 Antonio Ojea <antonio.ojea.garcia at gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |MOVED --- Comment #2 from Antonio Ojea

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1595 Antonio Ojea <antonio.ojea.garcia at gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |WORKSFORME --- Comment #2 from Antonio Ojea

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1730 Bug ID: 1730 Summary: nft does not handle IPv6 addresses with embedded IPv4 addresses Product: nftables Version: 1.0.x Hardware: All OS: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P5 Component: nft

UPDATE. The circuit has run clean since the 7th. It seems the telco found a problem after all but they can't tell me what they did... cause they think it was fixed as part of another case. Grrr. Well, I never doubted the T400P too much but I went ahead and bought a different card just in case. Haven't had to use it so far. One of the biggest reasons I did not think the Wildcard was at

Dear All. I want to use 'not' for 2 addresses (for both) in ipfw2 rule. The only way that looks like what I need is # ipfw add count from IP1 to not IP2,IP3 But does this rule indeed makes what I want? Does it count all packets destined to addresses other then IP2 AND IP3?! No other syntax works. For example more logically correct not IP2 AND not IP3 or even not { IP2 or IP3 } are

Hey, I''m trying to set up a Gentoo box to replace an aging BSD box here. The BSD box is running packet filter and I have it set up to take all data and route it to one of six sattelites. I have come up with the following config, but unfortunately I have no real way to test it short of switching the satellites over to the new system and prayer. The setup is: 192.168.252/22 - The LAN

Hello I have a PC with 2 IPs publics IP1 in eth0 and IP2 in eth0:0 I want to do a redirection of IP2 to an other public IP IP3 in an other laptop (other network) - for all ports : IP2 ---> IP3 - for juste www : IP2:www --> IP3:www i tried many combination with shorewall-3.0.7-4, but no sucess no help from google, Thanks in advance Laurent

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=83271 Priority: medium Bug ID: 83271 Assignee: nouveau at lists.freedesktop.org Summary: Windowed mode causes framebuffer not to refresh with PRIME on optimus/kepler discrete GPU QA Contact: xorg-team at lists.x.org Severity: normal Classification: Unclassified

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1435 Bug ID: 1435 Summary: segfault when using iptables-nft and iptables-legacy inside a container Product: libnftnl Version: unspecified Hardware: x86_64 OS: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P5 Component: