something strange with mbuf length...

"John R. Shannon" <johnjohnrshannon.com>
writes:

> Steven M. Bellovin wrote:
>> On Sat, 22 Apr 2006 13:13:19 +0100, Rui Paulo
<rpaulofnop.net> wrote:
>>
>>> "Konstantin KABASSANOV"
<Konstantin.Kabassanovlip6.fr> writes:
>>>
>>>> I do use ipfilter.
>>> Since you and Steve both use ipfilter, can this
be the problem ?
>>>
>> That's very high on my list of suspects.  I've
had the crash when using
>> two different interfaces, ath0 and ppp0.  The ppp0
instance doesn't
>> support v6; in fact, when I fire up ntpd after
starting that link, I get
>> bind() fd 12, family 24, port 123, addr
fe80::211:25ff:fe43:e8a4,
>> in6_is_addr_multicast=0 flags=0 fails: Can't
assign requested address
>> My filter rules are very simple, too; no NAT, no
proxies, just
>> blocking a few ports.
>> 		--Steven M. Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbi
a.edu/~smb
>
>
> My lockups are unrelated. I'm using neither ath0, ppp0
or any packet
> filter. Rate of occurance is several time per day.

But you use INET6 I bet (or at least you have it enabled).
Am I wrong ? 

-- 
  Rui Paulo			<rpaulo{NetBSD{,-PT}.org,fnop.net}>

On Sat, 22 Apr 2006 15:28:41 +0100, Rui Paulo <rpaulofnop.net> wrote:

>
> >
> > My lockups are unrelated. I'm using neither ath0,
ppp0 or any packet
> > filter. Rate of occurance is several time per day.
> 
> But you use INET6 I bet (or at least you have it
enabled). Am I wrong ? 
> 
Absolutely.  In fact, I used it last week (accidentally, but
that's
another story).

		--Steven M. Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbi
a.edu/~smb