Re: mod_php vs fastcgi/php speed
Dnia Friday 19 of March 2004 06:42, Joris napisa: So far a google search has yielded nothing but unbacked statements (I'll clean up the language a bit): mod_php is a lot fast er than php-cgi, and fastcgi/php is a lot faster than mod_php. Not very usefull. For me it was 0.7 req/s on one machine with mod_suphp (almost the same thing as php-cgi) and 70 req/s with php-fastcgi version. The interesting thing is that no one works on fixing perchild MPM in apache2 that would allow to use standard mod_php in secure way :/ It would be great if someone get paid to fix that once for all. -- Greetings Joris [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Arkadiusz Mikiewicz CS at FoE, Wroclaw University of Technology arekm.pld-linux.org, 1024/3DB19BBD, JID: arekm.jabber.org, PLD/Linux
Undelivered mail: Re: Re: Document
Dear User, the message with following attributes has not been delivered, because contains an infected object. Sender = [EMAIL PROTECTED] (may be forged) Recipients = [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject = Re: Re: Document Message-ID = [unknown-id] Antivirus filter report: --- Dr.Web report --- Following virus(es) has been found: Known virus(es): Win32.HLLM.Netsky.based Dr.Web detailed report: 127.0.0.1 [17222] drweb.tmp.eX2faH - archive MAIL 127.0.0.1 [17222] drweb.tmp.eX2faH/[text:plain] - Ok 127.0.0.1 [17222] drweb.tmp.eX2faH/your_document.pif packed by PETITE 127.0.0.1 [17222] drweb.tmp.eX2faH/your_document.pif infected with Win32.HLLM.Netsky.based Dr.Web scanning statistic: Known viruses : 1 --- Dr.Web report --- The original message was stored in archive record named: drweb-n.quarantine.FELMck In order to receive the original message, please send request to [EMAIL PROTECTED], referring to the archive record name given above. --- Antivirus service provided by Dr.Web(R) Daemon for Unix (http://www.drweb.ru, http://www.dials.ru/english) UWAGA! Wiadomo zawierajca wymienione poniej atrybuty nie zostaa dostarczona, poniewa zawiera zainfekowany obiekt. Nadawca = [EMAIL PROTECTED] Odbiorcy = [EMAIL PROTECTED] Temat = Re: Re: Document Identyfikator wiadomoci = [unknown-id] --- Dr.Web report --- Wykryto nastpujce wirusy: Known virus(es): Win32.HLLM.Netsky.based Szczegowy raport programu Dr.Web: 127.0.0.1 [17222] drweb.tmp.eX2faH - archive MAIL 127.0.0.1 [17222] drweb.tmp.eX2faH/[text:plain] - Ok 127.0.0.1 [17222] drweb.tmp.eX2faH/your_document.pif packed by PETITE 127.0.0.1 [17222] drweb.tmp.eX2faH/your_document.pif infected with Win32.HLLM.Netsky.based Statystyka testowania Dr.Web: Known viruses : 1 --- Dr.Web report --- Oryginalna wiadomo zostaa zapisana pod nazw: drweb-n.quarantine.FELMck Aby otrzyma oryginaln wiadomo naley zwrci si pod adres [EMAIL PROTECTED], zaczajc wymienion powyej nazw. --- Test antywirusowy zosta przeprowadzony przy uyciu Demona Dr.Web(R) dla systemu Unix (http://www.drweb.com.pl) Received: from unknown (HELO mailing.pracuj.pl) (217.98.193.162) by smtp.id.pl with SMTP; 19 Mar 2004 08:50:41 - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Re: Document Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 09:51:20 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary==_NextPart_000_0004_355A.0217 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Re: mod_php vs fastcgi/php speed
On Fri, Mar 19, 2004 at 06:42:08AM +0100, Joris wrote: Also, experiences migrating from mod_php to (fast)cgi/php would be welcome :) You'll need to recompile the interpreter. That's a lot of fun. Privilege separation and fastcgi is not trivial to solve. You must specify a different interpreter for each user. Authorization and fastcgi is also an interesting question (just as with interpreted scripts in general). bit, adam -- Seven deadly sins | 1024D/37B8D989 | Seven signs Seven gates to hell | 954B 998A E5F5 BA2A 3622 | Seven lies Seven world wonders | 82DD 54C2 843D 37B8 D989 | Seven days Seven years bad luck | http://sks.dnsalias.net | Seven dreams -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: mod_php vs fastcgi/php speed
Dnia Friday 19 of March 2004 11:24, Adam ENDRODI napisa: Privilege separation and fastcgi is not trivial to solve. You must specify a different interpreter for each user. Huh? Why different interpreter? http://www.t17.ds.pwr.wroc.pl/~misiek/index.php/ApacheModFastcgiPHP Authorization and fastcgi is also an interesting question (just as with interpreted scripts in general). I did not yet hit that problem bit, adam -- Arkadiusz Mikiewicz CS at FoE, Wroclaw University of Technology arekm.pld-linux.org, 1024/3DB19BBD, JID: arekm.jabber.org, PLD/Linux
Re: mod_php vs fastcgi/php speed
Arkadiusz Miskiewicz wrote: Dnia Friday 19 of March 2004 06:42, Joris napisa: So far a google search has yielded nothing but unbacked statements (I'll clean up the language a bit): mod_php is a lot fast er than php-cgi, and fastcgi/php is a lot faster than mod_php. Not very usefull. For me it was 0.7 req/s on one machine with mod_suphp (almost the same thing as php-cgi) and 70 req/s with php-fastcgi version. Interesting and promising. Of course I wonder how fast plain mod_php (or with a php accelerator on top of it) would be. The interesting thing is that no one works on fixing perchild MPM in apache2 that would allow to use standard mod_php in secure way :/ Is that the mode where the clients run with a different uid for each virtual host? It would be great if someone get paid to fix that once for all. Maybe someone should setup a donations box and put a price on the perchild MPM feature. -- Greetings Joris [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: mod_php vs fastcgi/php speed
On Fri, 19 Mar 2004 22:05, Joris [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The interesting thing is that no one works on fixing perchild MPM in apache2 that would allow to use standard mod_php in secure way :/ Is that the mode where the clients run with a different uid for each virtual host? Yes. One thing that we have idly talked about is getting perchild MPM to re-exec apache for each child (instead of just fork and setuid()). This would permit a SE Linux aware version of the module to have each instance in a different security context. -- http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/ My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/postal/Postal SMTP/POP benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: SOT: killhttpd - or any process maybe
Ok - just answering my own question for future reference. I found this one and it's great! http://sysfence.sourceforge.net/ mimo mimo wrote: Slightly off topic: we have an old server running old RedHat and there is no way of updating it so will have to rebuild it. One thing with its apache is that it keeps generating huge server load - probably because of some cms. Anyway I was looking for a daemon that monitors a group of processes and - if they generate too much load over a long period of time - kill them. I have found this one: (procmurderd) http://216.239.59.104/search?q=cache:fkRxpKTfiEEJ:www.he.net/adm/procmurderd.html+kill+load+daemonhl=enie=UTF-8 which would do what I want and a bit more. But tehre is no source code there and couldnt find it anywhere else. Does anzone know of such a daemon, used one? Thanks, mimo -- Please note that this account is being filtered using anti UCE systems. If you send email to this account make sure that it could not be mistaken as UCE. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: mod_php vs fastcgi/php speed
On Fri, 2004-03-19 at 08:11, Arkadiusz Miskiewicz wrote: The interesting thing is that no one works on fixing perchild MPM in apache2 that would allow to use standard mod_php in secure way :/ It would be great if someone get paid to fix that once for all. Hi, I wonder if you could fill me in on the details or point me to the right web pages. I am interested in two issues * How difficult is it to do? (est Man hours would be useful too) * What are the benefits? Thanks and best wishes, Shri -- Shri Shrikumar U R Byte Solutions Tel: 0845 644 4745 I.T. Consultant Edinburgh, Scotland Mob: 0773 980 3499 Web: www.urbyte.com Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: mod_php vs fastcgi/php speed
Shri Shrikumar wrote: On Fri, 2004-03-19 at 08:11, Arkadiusz Miskiewicz wrote: The interesting thing is that no one works on fixing perchild MPM in apache2 that would allow to use standard mod_php in secure way :/ It would be great if someone get paid to fix that once for all. I wonder if you could fill me in on the details or point me to the right web pages. I am interested in two issues I assume you're talking about fixing perchild MPM here. * How difficult is it to do? (est Man hours would be useful too) I have no idea, but it could involve changing the apache source code. It's not just a matter of configuration files. * What are the benefits? It would mean that the proces reading, serving and executing the webpages has the same userid than the creator (the user) of those pages. It eliminates quite a few security issues in a fundamental way. Also, it would mean that for instance mod_php and (fast)cgi/php can compare directly in terms of security, so the administrator has more freedom to weight speed and design philosophy against one another. -- Greetings Joris [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: sslwrap problem
Hi, On Sat Mar 13, 2004 at 15:10:36 -0900, W.D.McKinney wrote: I used apt-get to install sslwrap in testing. [Many lines of output snipped] What is needed to get /etc/init.d/sslwrap: update-inetd to work for sslwrap ? You need netbase. Regards, uLI -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: mod_php vs fastcgi/php speed
Dnia Friday 19 of March 2004 14:32, Shri Shrikumar napisa: * How difficult is it to do? (est Man hours would be useful too) I'm not familiar with apache internals, so I can't say but MPM's are written in modular way so it does not need to rewrite whole apache. You would have to fix/rewrite only one MPM module. * What are the benefits? Joris replied about that, so I only add few things... - from what I know no one from apache team is working on fixing perchild (no idea why) - some guy started writting new MPM working in similar way as perchild - it's called metux MPM ( http://www.metux.de/mpm/en/?patpage=index, http://www.sannes.org/metuxmpm/). Unfortunately this project seems to be dead (or almost dead), too. - with perchild you will have each virtual host running under UID/GID specified in config file so you will have secure php, cgi, mod_perl, mod_python, mod_whatever (currently there are ways to get php and cgi (and only these) working under specified UID/GID). Docs about perchild http://httpd.apache.org/docs-2.0/mod/perchild.html Right now running apache and having multiple virtual hosts for multiple clients is not secure. Each client can look into others *.php, *.inc files, read for example database passwords from these files etc. Thanks and best wishes, Shri -- Arkadiusz Mikiewicz CS at FoE, Wroclaw University of Technology arekm.pld-linux.org, 1024/3DB19BBD, JID: arekm.jabber.org, PLD/Linux
Re: mod_php vs fastcgi/php speed
On Fri, Mar 19, 2004 at 04:22:27PM +0100, Arkadiusz Miskiewicz wrote: Right now running apache and having multiple virtual hosts for multiple clients is not secure. Each client can look into others *.php, *.inc files, read for example database passwords from these files etc. suexec is meant to improve the situation, though it has proven quote inflexible for my purposes. I have written a suexec compatible wrapper called csux that allows for, for example, specifying a different execution uid than the program's owner. (suexec runs everything with the uid of owner, unless you're using virtual hosts which you can't if you're communicating over https...). I think it's an important security gain, because this way a cy PHP script won't be able to read/write arbitrary files in its web repository. bit, adam -- Seven deadly sins | 1024D/37B8D989 | Seven signs Seven gates to hell | 954B 998A E5F5 BA2A 3622 | Seven lies Seven world wonders | 82DD 54C2 843D 37B8 D989 | Seven days Seven years bad luck | http://sks.dnsalias.net | Seven dreams -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: mod_php vs fastcgi/php speed [BENCHMARK]
Hi, On Fri, 2004-03-19 at 06:42, Joris wrote: Hi, I'm looking for some in-depth information on the speed difference between mod_php and using php-cgi with fastcgi. So far a google search has yielded nothing but unbacked statements (I'll clean up the language a bit): mod_php is a lot fast er than php-cgi, and fastcgi/php is a lot faster than mod_php. Not very usefull. Anyone care to shed some light/benchmarks here? hhmm you made me curious, and I started a benchmark, here the results: http://www.meebey.net/temp/php4-mod-vs-cgi/ (btw the server is a P3 1ghz, 512MB RAM, Debian Woody) Summary of the benchmark PHP4 module, very simple script (phpinfo.php): requests/s plain 130.04 +turckcache 129.42 +turckcache+zend-optimizer 125.50 PHP4 module, very complex script (insurance application): requests/s plain 1.84 +turckcache 6.23 +turckcache+zend-optimizer 5.58 +optimizer 1.58 PHP4 CGI, very simple script (phpinfo.php): requests/s plain 22.69 +turckcache n/a* +turckcache+zend-optimizer n/a* +optimizer 21.23 PHP4 CGI, very complex script (insurance application): requests/s plain 2.00 +turckcache n/a* +turckcache+zend-optimizer n/a* +optimizer 1.72 * = turkcache doesn't support caching of the PHP scripts in CGI mode Also, experiences migrating from mod_php to (fast)cgi/php would be welcome :) migrating from mod to cgi is good as in security, but performance and also problems with some scripts. Those problems with scripts come from .htaccess files which try to change things with php_flag (which is not possible with cgi). Also sometimes script use variables like $_SERVER['SCRIPT_NAME'], they get changed by cgi-handler apache things. They usually still work, but its still different than before (with php_mod). E.g. with mod_php SCRIPT_NAME is foo.php, with cgi its something like cgi-bin/php/foo.bar If you use suPHP though (www.suphp.org), it will correct those $_SERVER info... I hope this answered your questions -- Mirco 'meebey' Bauer PGP-Key: http://search.keyserver.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0x5051C9B9 -BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK- Version: 3.12 GIT d s-: a--- C++ UL++ P L++$+++$ E W+++$ N o? K- w++! O- M- V? PS PE+ Y- PGP++ t 5+ X++ R tv+ b+ DI? D+ G++ e h! r++ y? --END GEEK CODE BLOCK-- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: mod_php vs fastcgi/php speed [BENCHMARK]
Dnia Friday 19 of March 2004 20:48, Mirco 'meebey' Bauer napisa: migrating from mod to cgi is good as in security, but performance and also problems with some scripts. Could you also test fastcgi? cgi and fastcgi are different beasts. Mirco 'meebey' Bauer -- Arkadiusz Mikiewicz CS at FoE, Wroclaw University of Technology arekm.pld-linux.org, 1024/3DB19BBD, JID: arekm.jabber.org, PLD/Linux
Acknowledgement of your message to Technical Support
=== This is an automatic response to the message you sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] You will not receive this automatic response to mail sent to this address more often than once per day. We receive a large volume of email every day, and in order to be able to provide the quickest responses we will address some of the more common questions here. If your question is not answered here or in the resources listed here, you can resend your message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] to reach a support technician. Our support department is primarily responsible for supporting the products we sell and priority will be given to Micro Firmware customers. If you are looking for a BIOS upgrade: We have BIOS upgrades for the systems listed on our website: http://www.firmware.com/sales/bios/ http://www.firmware.com/support/bios/mfibios.htm All of these upgrades are for systems made by Gateway, Micron, or Packard Bell, or systems which use these Intel or Micronics motherboards. We sell these BIOS upgrades mainly to add support for larger hard drives and newer CPUs. For all other systems, our ATA PRO line of add-in cards add support for large hard drives. See: http://www.firmware.com/sales/atapro We do not have BIOS upgrades for any notebook systems. Motherboard or system manufacturers are normally the only source for BIOS updates. If you are needing support for the BIOS on your system or help with some other problem on your computer system: There are over a thousand different motherboards made by hundreds of manufacturers. Each has a unique BIOS normally created by the motherboard manufacturer using core code licensed from a company such as Phoenix, Award, or AMI. Phoenix or Micro Firmware have no information on any specific BIOSes. All support for BIOS issues is the responsibility of the system and/or motherboard manufacturer. If you are needing support for a larger hard drive: We offer a line of add-in cards with BIOS extensions on them to add BIOS support for larger drives. Our ATA PRO Flash card is $34.95 plus shipping and can be ordered from our sales department at 800-767-5465 or 405-321-8333 or [EMAIL PROTECTED] or directly from our website. This card adds support for hard drives up to 127 gigabytes. For more info on the ATA PRO cards, see our website: http://www.firmware.com/sales/atapro/ http://www.firmware.com/support/atapro/atapro.htm === If you are needing info on how to access CMOS setup or you are needing a setup disk: The default setup keys for Phoenix ROM BIOS Plus would be CTL-ALT-ESC. The default setup keys for Phoenix A486 would be CTL-ALT-S. The default setup key for Phoenix 4.03, 4.04, 4.05, and 4.06 (4.0 Release 6.x) BIOSes is F2. These defaults could have been changed by the OEM to anything they wanted to use instead. Dell systems usually use CTL-ALT-ENTER. XT systems do not have a setup program. Any configurable options are set by DIP switches on the motherboard. Also, this board may require an external setup program to access CMOS setup. This would have been provided with the system and a replacement copy would be provided by the system manufacturer. This file has some info on locating setup programs for certain brands of PCs: http://www.firmware.com/support/bios/setupdsk.htm If this board needs an external setup program and you cannot locate the correct program for that system, we keep a generic Phoenix BIOS setup program on our website at: http://www.firmware.com/support/bios/setup.exe We provide no support on this program. It may not work on your system and it may possibly render the system unusable. If you get into trouble with this program, the solution may be to clear CMOS RAM. Some info on that can be found in this document: http://www.firmware.com/support/bios/cmosclr.htm If you are getting an error message concerning Phoenix Miser after installing or reformatting a hard drive on a notebook system with a Phoenix BIOS: We do not sell or support PHDISK. You would need to contact the notebook manufacturer for any help. For some additional info, see: http://www.phoenix.com/support/notebook.html#Q1.6 We have no BIOS upgrades for any notebook systems. We have no information on any notebook systems. We sell no products for any notebook systems. Many other topics are addressed in technical documents on our website at: http://www.firmware.com/support/ If you are a Micro Firmware customer and have a question or need some help with a product purchased from us, please email us at [EMAIL PROTECTED] or call us at 405-321-8333. If you are not a Micro
Problems with pppoe(pppd)
Hello. I am having a realy weird problem with pppoe. My linux router (debian 3.0 woody) keeps droping my internet connection when under heavy load. By heavy load I mean 200k downlink and 30k+ uplink with a lot of open connections(500+) which ussualy happens when running some sort of p2p client... I tried to simulate the sam load when dialing with my windows machine and the link did not drop Here is the c/p from syslog: Mar 17 19:42:46 gw pppoe[6846]: send (sendPacket): No buffer space available Mar 17 19:42:46 gw pppd[209]: Modem hangup Mar 17 19:42:46 gw pppd[209]: Connection terminated. Mar 17 19:42:46 gw pppd[209]: Connect time .6 minutes. Mar 17 19:42:46 gw pppd[209]: Sent 1370554759 bytes, received 2927735986 bytes. Mar 17 19:43:16 gw pppd[209]: Serial connection established. Mar 17 19:43:16 gw pppd[209]: Using interface ppp0 Mar 17 19:43:16 gw pppd[209]: Connect: ppp0 -- /dev/pts/0 Mar 17 19:43:17 gw pppoe[7396]: PADS: Service-Name: '' Mar 17 19:43:17 gw pppoe[7396]: PPP session is 1517 Mar 17 19:43:20 gw pppd[209]: PAP authentication failed Mar 17 19:43:20 gw pppd[209]: Connection terminated. Mar 17 19:43:20 gw pppoe[7396]: read (asyncReadFromPPP): Input/output error Mar 17 19:43:20 gw pppoe[7396]: Sent PADT Mar 17 19:43:50 gw pppd[209]: Serial connection established. Mar 17 19:43:50 gw pppd[209]: Using interface ppp0 Mar 17 19:43:50 gw pppd[209]: Connect: ppp0 -- /dev/pts/1 Mar 17 19:43:50 gw pppoe[7405]: PADS: Service-Name: '' Mar 17 19:43:50 gw pppoe[7405]: PPP session is 1519 Mar 17 19:43:54 gw pppd[209]: PAP authentication failed Mar 17 19:43:54 gw pppd[209]: Connection terminated. Mar 17 19:43:54 gw pppoe[7405]: read (asyncReadFromPPP): Input/output error Mar 17 19:43:54 gw pppoe[7405]: Sent PADT Mar 17 19:44:24 gw pppd[209]: Serial connection established. Mar 17 19:44:24 gw pppd[209]: Using interface ppp0 Mar 17 19:44:24 gw pppd[209]: Connect: ppp0 -- /dev/pts/1 Mar 17 19:44:24 gw pppoe[7422]: PADS: Service-Name: '' Mar 17 19:44:24 gw pppoe[7422]: PPP session is 1521 Mar 17 19:44:27 gw pppd[209]: PAP authentication failed Mar 17 19:44:27 gw pppd[209]: Connection terminated. Mar 17 19:44:27 gw pppoe[7422]: read (asyncReadFromPPP): Input/output error Mar 17 19:44:27 gw pppoe[7422]: Sent PADT Mar 17 19:44:57 gw pppd[209]: Serial connection established. Mar 17 19:44:57 gw pppd[209]: Using interface ppp0 Mar 17 19:44:57 gw pppd[209]: Connect: ppp0 -- /dev/pts/1 Mar 17 19:44:57 gw pppoe[7442]: PADS: Service-Name: '' Mar 17 19:44:57 gw pppoe[7442]: PPP session is 1522 Mar 17 19:45:01 gw pppd[209]: PAP authentication failed Mar 17 19:45:01 gw pppd[209]: Connection terminated. Mar 17 19:45:01 gw pppoe[7442]: read (asyncReadFromPPP): Input/output error Mar 17 19:45:01 gw pppoe[7442]: Sent PADT Mar 17 19:45:31 gw pppd[209]: Serial connection established. Mar 17 19:45:31 gw pppd[209]: Using interface ppp0 Mar 17 19:45:31 gw pppd[209]: Connect: ppp0 -- /dev/pts/1 Mar 17 19:45:31 gw pppoe[7454]: PADS: Service-Name: '' Mar 17 19:45:31 gw pppoe[7454]: PPP session is 1524 Mar 17 19:45:35 gw pppd[209]: Cannot determine ethernet address for proxy ARP Mar 17 19:45:35 gw pppd[209]: local IP address 193.95.243.xxx Mar 17 19:45:35 gw pppd[209]: remote IP address 213.250.19.90 Mar 17 19:45:35 gw pppd[209]: primary DNS address 193.189.160.11 Mar 17 19:45:35 gw pppd[209]: secondary DNS address 193.189.160.12 As you can see from the syslog after some time the link is re-established.. Any clues why is this happening or how to fix it? Best regards Ales
Re: LinkWalker
I have this same robot on my site. Can i Block this robot using .htaccess files..??? Chris http://www.truefootball.com http://www.worldofjerseys.com
Re: mod_php vs fastcgi/php speed [BENCHMARK]
Arkadiusz Miskiewicz wrote: Dnia Friday 19 of March 2004 20:48, Mirco 'meebey' Bauer napisa: migrating from mod to cgi is good as in security, but performance and also problems with some scripts. Could you also test fastcgi? cgi and fastcgi are different beasts. I assume turckcache is turcksoft mmcache? (turck-mmcache.sourceforge.net) The almost-zero improvement is odd, in my experience it generally brings a spectacular improvement. Perhaps you need to load the webserver a little more? Or even better yet, post the apache config files online, and I'll run the benchmarks on some older hardware. -- Greetings Joris [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dsl Verizon.com
Paul Johnson wrote: Christopher J. Noyes [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I have DSL with verizon.com. It uses a Westel Wirespeed external modem connected to a network card though ethernet. Does anyone know how configure this on debian? If you're lucky, and they're not using PPPoE, then this will be easy. All you need to do is plug that puppy into your gateway box and try setting it up like it's on a DHCP-configured network, and it should Just Work. If it uses PPPoE, check google. Looking through the dwww running on my site, I find a DSL HOWTO... http://ursine.ca/cgi-bin/dwww?type=filelocation=/usr/share/doc/HOWTO/en-html/HOWTO-INDEX/../DSL-HOWTO/index.html ...and the Bridge+Firewall+DSL HOWTO... http://ursine.ca/cgi-bin/dwww?type=filelocation=/usr/share/doc/HOWTO/en-html/HOWTO-INDEX/../Bridge%2BFirewall%2BDSL.html Hope this helps. This guy here explains how to setup a westell in Linux: http://www.trekweb.com/~jasonb/articles/westell_linux.shtml -Roberto signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: dsl Verizon.com
H. S. wrote: Apparently, _Christopher J. Noyes_, on 03/19/04 00:00,typed: I have DSL with verizon.com. It uses a Westel Wirespeed external modem connected to a network card though ethernet. Does anyone know how configure this on debian? Christopher J. Noyes (maybe this explains why you are using M$ LookOut to post this :)) Could be that since he can't get his home internet setup he has to post from work, where only MSO is available. BTW, have you tried Mozilla on WIndows? But coming back to your query, pppoeconf should automatically detect the DSL connection on one of youe eth cards, as longas the cable is connected and the modem is switched ON. Don't waste time with pppoe. Set your NIC to pick up a DHCP address, plugin the modem, and surf to http://192.168.1.254 Everything is configurable from there. -HS -Roberto signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
mod_php vs fastcgi/php speed
Hi, I'm looking for some in-depth information on the speed difference between mod_php and using php-cgi with fastcgi. So far a google search has yielded nothing but unbacked statements (I'll clean up the language a bit): mod_php is a lot fast er than php-cgi, and fastcgi/php is a lot faster than mod_php. Not very usefull. Anyone care to shed some light/benchmarks here? Also, experiences migrating from mod_php to (fast)cgi/php would be welcome :) -- Greetings Joris [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dsl Verizon.com
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Christopher J. Noyes [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I have DSL with verizon.com. It uses a Westel Wirespeed external modem connected to a network card though ethernet. Does anyone know how configure this on debian? If you're lucky, and they're not using PPPoE, then this will be easy. All you need to do is plug that puppy into your gateway box and try setting it up like it's on a DHCP-configured network, and it should Just Work. If it uses PPPoE, check google. Looking through the dwww running on my site, I find a DSL HOWTO... http://ursine.ca/cgi-bin/dwww?type=filelocation=/usr/share/doc/HOWTO/en-html/HOWTO-INDEX/../DSL-HOWTO/index.html ...and the Bridge+Firewall+DSL HOWTO... http://ursine.ca/cgi-bin/dwww?type=filelocation=/usr/share/doc/HOWTO/en-html/HOWTO-INDEX/../Bridge%2BFirewall%2BDSL.html Hope this helps. - -- .''`. Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] : :' : `. `'` proud Debian admin and user `- Debian. Because it *must* work. debian.org aboutdebian.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFAWo2mUzgNqloQMwcRAkojAJ9V11yjI27njdGDuF7Tknxd7Nne+gCgtTim h/2f46DevQDeJIfqbc2M6Kg= =Ckbf -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: mod_php vs fastcgi/php speed
Dnia Friday 19 of March 2004 06:42, Joris napisa: So far a google search has yielded nothing but unbacked statements (I'll clean up the language a bit): mod_php is a lot fast er than php-cgi, and fastcgi/php is a lot faster than mod_php. Not very usefull. For me it was 0.7 req/s on one machine with mod_suphp (almost the same thing as php-cgi) and 70 req/s with php-fastcgi version. The interesting thing is that no one works on fixing perchild MPM in apache2 that would allow to use standard mod_php in secure way :/ It would be great if someone get paid to fix that once for all. -- Greetings Joris [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Arkadiusz Mikiewicz CS at FoE, Wroclaw University of Technology arekm.pld-linux.org, 1024/3DB19BBD, JID: arekm.jabber.org, PLD/Linux
Undelivered mail: Re: Re: Document
Dear User, the message with following attributes has not been delivered, because contains an infected object. Sender = debian-isp@lists.debian.org (may be forged) Recipients = [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject = Re: Re: Document Message-ID = [unknown-id] Antivirus filter report: --- Dr.Web report --- Following virus(es) has been found: Known virus(es): Win32.HLLM.Netsky.based Dr.Web detailed report: 127.0.0.1 [17222] drweb.tmp.eX2faH - archive MAIL 127.0.0.1 [17222] drweb.tmp.eX2faH/[text:plain] - Ok 127.0.0.1 [17222] drweb.tmp.eX2faH/your_document.pif packed by PETITE 127.0.0.1 [17222] drweb.tmp.eX2faH/your_document.pif infected with Win32.HLLM.Netsky.based Dr.Web scanning statistic: Known viruses : 1 --- Dr.Web report --- The original message was stored in archive record named: drweb-n.quarantine.FELMck In order to receive the original message, please send request to [EMAIL PROTECTED], referring to the archive record name given above. --- Antivirus service provided by Dr.Web(R) Daemon for Unix (http://www.drweb.ru, http://www.dials.ru/english) UWAGA! Wiadomo zawierajca wymienione poniej atrybuty nie zostaa dostarczona, poniewa zawiera zainfekowany obiekt. Nadawca = debian-isp@lists.debian.org Odbiorcy = [EMAIL PROTECTED] Temat = Re: Re: Document Identyfikator wiadomoci = [unknown-id] --- Dr.Web report --- Wykryto nastpujce wirusy: Known virus(es): Win32.HLLM.Netsky.based Szczegowy raport programu Dr.Web: 127.0.0.1 [17222] drweb.tmp.eX2faH - archive MAIL 127.0.0.1 [17222] drweb.tmp.eX2faH/[text:plain] - Ok 127.0.0.1 [17222] drweb.tmp.eX2faH/your_document.pif packed by PETITE 127.0.0.1 [17222] drweb.tmp.eX2faH/your_document.pif infected with Win32.HLLM.Netsky.based Statystyka testowania Dr.Web: Known viruses : 1 --- Dr.Web report --- Oryginalna wiadomo zostaa zapisana pod nazw: drweb-n.quarantine.FELMck Aby otrzyma oryginaln wiadomo naley zwrci si pod adres [EMAIL PROTECTED], zaczajc wymienion powyej nazw. --- Test antywirusowy zosta przeprowadzony przy uyciu Demona Dr.Web(R) dla systemu Unix (http://www.drweb.com.pl) Received: from unknown (HELO mailing.pracuj.pl) (217.98.193.162) by smtp.id.pl with SMTP; 19 Mar 2004 08:50:41 - From: debian-isp@lists.debian.org To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Re: Document Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 09:51:20 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary==_NextPart_000_0004_355A.0217 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Re: mod_php vs fastcgi/php speed
On Fri, Mar 19, 2004 at 06:42:08AM +0100, Joris wrote: Also, experiences migrating from mod_php to (fast)cgi/php would be welcome :) You'll need to recompile the interpreter. That's a lot of fun. Privilege separation and fastcgi is not trivial to solve. You must specify a different interpreter for each user. Authorization and fastcgi is also an interesting question (just as with interpreted scripts in general). bit, adam -- Seven deadly sins | 1024D/37B8D989 | Seven signs Seven gates to hell | 954B 998A E5F5 BA2A 3622 | Seven lies Seven world wonders | 82DD 54C2 843D 37B8 D989 | Seven days Seven years bad luck | http://sks.dnsalias.net | Seven dreams
Re: mod_php vs fastcgi/php speed
Dnia Friday 19 of March 2004 11:24, Adam ENDRODI napisa: Privilege separation and fastcgi is not trivial to solve. You must specify a different interpreter for each user. Huh? Why different interpreter? http://www.t17.ds.pwr.wroc.pl/~misiek/index.php/ApacheModFastcgiPHP Authorization and fastcgi is also an interesting question (just as with interpreted scripts in general). I did not yet hit that problem bit, adam -- Arkadiusz Mikiewicz CS at FoE, Wroclaw University of Technology arekm.pld-linux.org, 1024/3DB19BBD, JID: arekm.jabber.org, PLD/Linux
Re: mod_php vs fastcgi/php speed
Arkadiusz Miskiewicz wrote: Dnia Friday 19 of March 2004 06:42, Joris napisa: So far a google search has yielded nothing but unbacked statements (I'll clean up the language a bit): mod_php is a lot fast er than php-cgi, and fastcgi/php is a lot faster than mod_php. Not very usefull. For me it was 0.7 req/s on one machine with mod_suphp (almost the same thing as php-cgi) and 70 req/s with php-fastcgi version. Interesting and promising. Of course I wonder how fast plain mod_php (or with a php accelerator on top of it) would be. The interesting thing is that no one works on fixing perchild MPM in apache2 that would allow to use standard mod_php in secure way :/ Is that the mode where the clients run with a different uid for each virtual host? It would be great if someone get paid to fix that once for all. Maybe someone should setup a donations box and put a price on the perchild MPM feature. -- Greetings Joris [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: mod_php vs fastcgi/php speed
On Fri, 19 Mar 2004 22:05, Joris [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The interesting thing is that no one works on fixing perchild MPM in apache2 that would allow to use standard mod_php in secure way :/ Is that the mode where the clients run with a different uid for each virtual host? Yes. One thing that we have idly talked about is getting perchild MPM to re-exec apache for each child (instead of just fork and setuid()). This would permit a SE Linux aware version of the module to have each instance in a different security context. -- http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/ My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/postal/Postal SMTP/POP benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page
Re: SOT: killhttpd - or any process maybe
Ok - just answering my own question for future reference. I found this one and it's great! http://sysfence.sourceforge.net/ mimo mimo wrote: Slightly off topic: we have an old server running old RedHat and there is no way of updating it so will have to rebuild it. One thing with its apache is that it keeps generating huge server load - probably because of some cms. Anyway I was looking for a daemon that monitors a group of processes and - if they generate too much load over a long period of time - kill them. I have found this one: (procmurderd) http://216.239.59.104/search?q=cache:fkRxpKTfiEEJ:www.he.net/adm/procmurderd.html+kill+load+daemonhl=enie=UTF-8 which would do what I want and a bit more. But tehre is no source code there and couldnt find it anywhere else. Does anzone know of such a daemon, used one? Thanks, mimo -- Please note that this account is being filtered using anti UCE systems. If you send email to this account make sure that it could not be mistaken as UCE.
Re: mod_php vs fastcgi/php speed
On Fri, 2004-03-19 at 08:11, Arkadiusz Miskiewicz wrote: The interesting thing is that no one works on fixing perchild MPM in apache2 that would allow to use standard mod_php in secure way :/ It would be great if someone get paid to fix that once for all. Hi, I wonder if you could fill me in on the details or point me to the right web pages. I am interested in two issues * How difficult is it to do? (est Man hours would be useful too) * What are the benefits? Thanks and best wishes, Shri -- Shri Shrikumar U R Byte Solutions Tel: 0845 644 4745 I.T. Consultant Edinburgh, Scotland Mob: 0773 980 3499 Web: www.urbyte.com Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: mod_php vs fastcgi/php speed
Shri Shrikumar wrote: On Fri, 2004-03-19 at 08:11, Arkadiusz Miskiewicz wrote: The interesting thing is that no one works on fixing perchild MPM in apache2 that would allow to use standard mod_php in secure way :/ It would be great if someone get paid to fix that once for all. I wonder if you could fill me in on the details or point me to the right web pages. I am interested in two issues I assume you're talking about fixing perchild MPM here. * How difficult is it to do? (est Man hours would be useful too) I have no idea, but it could involve changing the apache source code. It's not just a matter of configuration files. * What are the benefits? It would mean that the proces reading, serving and executing the webpages has the same userid than the creator (the user) of those pages. It eliminates quite a few security issues in a fundamental way. Also, it would mean that for instance mod_php and (fast)cgi/php can compare directly in terms of security, so the administrator has more freedom to weight speed and design philosophy against one another. -- Greetings Joris [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: sslwrap problem
Hi, On Sat Mar 13, 2004 at 15:10:36 -0900, W.D.McKinney wrote: I used apt-get to install sslwrap in testing. [Many lines of output snipped] What is needed to get /etc/init.d/sslwrap: update-inetd to work for sslwrap ? You need netbase. Regards, uLI
Re: mod_php vs fastcgi/php speed
Dnia Friday 19 of March 2004 14:32, Shri Shrikumar napisa: * How difficult is it to do? (est Man hours would be useful too) I'm not familiar with apache internals, so I can't say but MPM's are written in modular way so it does not need to rewrite whole apache. You would have to fix/rewrite only one MPM module. * What are the benefits? Joris replied about that, so I only add few things... - from what I know no one from apache team is working on fixing perchild (no idea why) - some guy started writting new MPM working in similar way as perchild - it's called metux MPM ( http://www.metux.de/mpm/en/?patpage=index, http://www.sannes.org/metuxmpm/). Unfortunately this project seems to be dead (or almost dead), too. - with perchild you will have each virtual host running under UID/GID specified in config file so you will have secure php, cgi, mod_perl, mod_python, mod_whatever (currently there are ways to get php and cgi (and only these) working under specified UID/GID). Docs about perchild http://httpd.apache.org/docs-2.0/mod/perchild.html Right now running apache and having multiple virtual hosts for multiple clients is not secure. Each client can look into others *.php, *.inc files, read for example database passwords from these files etc. Thanks and best wishes, Shri -- Arkadiusz Mikiewicz CS at FoE, Wroclaw University of Technology arekm.pld-linux.org, 1024/3DB19BBD, JID: arekm.jabber.org, PLD/Linux
Re: mod_php vs fastcgi/php speed
On Fri, Mar 19, 2004 at 04:22:27PM +0100, Arkadiusz Miskiewicz wrote: Right now running apache and having multiple virtual hosts for multiple clients is not secure. Each client can look into others *.php, *.inc files, read for example database passwords from these files etc. suexec is meant to improve the situation, though it has proven quote inflexible for my purposes. I have written a suexec compatible wrapper called csux that allows for, for example, specifying a different execution uid than the program's owner. (suexec runs everything with the uid of owner, unless you're using virtual hosts which you can't if you're communicating over https...). I think it's an important security gain, because this way a cy PHP script won't be able to read/write arbitrary files in its web repository. bit, adam -- Seven deadly sins | 1024D/37B8D989 | Seven signs Seven gates to hell | 954B 998A E5F5 BA2A 3622 | Seven lies Seven world wonders | 82DD 54C2 843D 37B8 D989 | Seven days Seven years bad luck | http://sks.dnsalias.net | Seven dreams
Re: dsl Verizon.com
Paul Johnson wrote: Christopher J. Noyes [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I have DSL with verizon.com. It uses a Westel Wirespeed external modem connected to a network card though ethernet. Does anyone know how configure this on debian? If you're lucky, and they're not using PPPoE, then this will be easy. All you need to do is plug that puppy into your gateway box and try setting it up like it's on a DHCP-configured network, and it should Just Work. If it uses PPPoE, check google. Looking through the dwww running on my site, I find a DSL HOWTO... http://ursine.ca/cgi-bin/dwww?type=filelocation=/usr/share/doc/HOWTO/en-html/HOWTO-INDEX/../DSL-HOWTO/index.html ...and the Bridge+Firewall+DSL HOWTO... http://ursine.ca/cgi-bin/dwww?type=filelocation=/usr/share/doc/HOWTO/en-html/HOWTO-INDEX/../Bridge%2BFirewall%2BDSL.html Hope this helps. This guy here explains how to setup a westell in Linux: http://www.trekweb.com/~jasonb/articles/westell_linux.shtml -Roberto signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: dsl Verizon.com
H. S. wrote: Apparently, _Christopher J. Noyes_, on 03/19/04 00:00,typed: I have DSL with verizon.com. It uses a Westel Wirespeed external modem connected to a network card though ethernet. Does anyone know how configure this on debian? Christopher J. Noyes (maybe this explains why you are using M$ LookOut to post this :)) Could be that since he can't get his home internet setup he has to post from work, where only MSO is available. BTW, have you tried Mozilla on WIndows? But coming back to your query, pppoeconf should automatically detect the DSL connection on one of youe eth cards, as longas the cable is connected and the modem is switched ON. Don't waste time with pppoe. Set your NIC to pick up a DHCP address, plugin the modem, and surf to http://192.168.1.254 Everything is configurable from there. -HS -Roberto signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: mod_php vs fastcgi/php speed [BENCHMARK]
Hi, On Fri, 2004-03-19 at 06:42, Joris wrote: Hi, I'm looking for some in-depth information on the speed difference between mod_php and using php-cgi with fastcgi. So far a google search has yielded nothing but unbacked statements (I'll clean up the language a bit): mod_php is a lot fast er than php-cgi, and fastcgi/php is a lot faster than mod_php. Not very usefull. Anyone care to shed some light/benchmarks here? hhmm you made me curious, and I started a benchmark, here the results: http://www.meebey.net/temp/php4-mod-vs-cgi/ (btw the server is a P3 1ghz, 512MB RAM, Debian Woody) Summary of the benchmark PHP4 module, very simple script (phpinfo.php): requests/s plain 130.04 +turckcache 129.42 +turckcache+zend-optimizer 125.50 PHP4 module, very complex script (insurance application): requests/s plain 1.84 +turckcache 6.23 +turckcache+zend-optimizer 5.58 +optimizer 1.58 PHP4 CGI, very simple script (phpinfo.php): requests/s plain 22.69 +turckcache n/a* +turckcache+zend-optimizer n/a* +optimizer 21.23 PHP4 CGI, very complex script (insurance application): requests/s plain 2.00 +turckcache n/a* +turckcache+zend-optimizer n/a* +optimizer 1.72 * = turkcache doesn't support caching of the PHP scripts in CGI mode Also, experiences migrating from mod_php to (fast)cgi/php would be welcome :) migrating from mod to cgi is good as in security, but performance and also problems with some scripts. Those problems with scripts come from .htaccess files which try to change things with php_flag (which is not possible with cgi). Also sometimes script use variables like $_SERVER['SCRIPT_NAME'], they get changed by cgi-handler apache things. They usually still work, but its still different than before (with php_mod). E.g. with mod_php SCRIPT_NAME is foo.php, with cgi its something like cgi-bin/php/foo.bar If you use suPHP though (www.suphp.org), it will correct those $_SERVER info... I hope this answered your questions -- Mirco 'meebey' Bauer PGP-Key: http://search.keyserver.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0x5051C9B9 -BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK- Version: 3.12 GIT d s-: a--- C++ UL++ P L++$+++$ E W+++$ N o? K- w++! O- M- V? PS PE+ Y- PGP++ t 5+ X++ R tv+ b+ DI? D+ G++ e h! r++ y? --END GEEK CODE BLOCK--
Re: mod_php vs fastcgi/php speed [BENCHMARK]
Dnia Friday 19 of March 2004 20:48, Mirco 'meebey' Bauer napisa: migrating from mod to cgi is good as in security, but performance and also problems with some scripts. Could you also test fastcgi? cgi and fastcgi are different beasts. Mirco 'meebey' Bauer -- Arkadiusz Mikiewicz CS at FoE, Wroclaw University of Technology arekm.pld-linux.org, 1024/3DB19BBD, JID: arekm.jabber.org, PLD/Linux
Acknowledgement of your message to Technical Support
=== This is an automatic response to the message you sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] You will not receive this automatic response to mail sent to this address more often than once per day. We receive a large volume of email every day, and in order to be able to provide the quickest responses we will address some of the more common questions here. If your question is not answered here or in the resources listed here, you can resend your message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] to reach a support technician. Our support department is primarily responsible for supporting the products we sell and priority will be given to Micro Firmware customers. If you are looking for a BIOS upgrade: We have BIOS upgrades for the systems listed on our website: http://www.firmware.com/sales/bios/ http://www.firmware.com/support/bios/mfibios.htm All of these upgrades are for systems made by Gateway, Micron, or Packard Bell, or systems which use these Intel or Micronics motherboards. We sell these BIOS upgrades mainly to add support for larger hard drives and newer CPUs. For all other systems, our ATA PRO line of add-in cards add support for large hard drives. See: http://www.firmware.com/sales/atapro We do not have BIOS upgrades for any notebook systems. Motherboard or system manufacturers are normally the only source for BIOS updates. If you are needing support for the BIOS on your system or help with some other problem on your computer system: There are over a thousand different motherboards made by hundreds of manufacturers. Each has a unique BIOS normally created by the motherboard manufacturer using core code licensed from a company such as Phoenix, Award, or AMI. Phoenix or Micro Firmware have no information on any specific BIOSes. All support for BIOS issues is the responsibility of the system and/or motherboard manufacturer. If you are needing support for a larger hard drive: We offer a line of add-in cards with BIOS extensions on them to add BIOS support for larger drives. Our ATA PRO Flash card is $34.95 plus shipping and can be ordered from our sales department at 800-767-5465 or 405-321-8333 or [EMAIL PROTECTED] or directly from our website. This card adds support for hard drives up to 127 gigabytes. For more info on the ATA PRO cards, see our website: http://www.firmware.com/sales/atapro/ http://www.firmware.com/support/atapro/atapro.htm === If you are needing info on how to access CMOS setup or you are needing a setup disk: The default setup keys for Phoenix ROM BIOS Plus would be CTL-ALT-ESC. The default setup keys for Phoenix A486 would be CTL-ALT-S. The default setup key for Phoenix 4.03, 4.04, 4.05, and 4.06 (4.0 Release 6.x) BIOSes is F2. These defaults could have been changed by the OEM to anything they wanted to use instead. Dell systems usually use CTL-ALT-ENTER. XT systems do not have a setup program. Any configurable options are set by DIP switches on the motherboard. Also, this board may require an external setup program to access CMOS setup. This would have been provided with the system and a replacement copy would be provided by the system manufacturer. This file has some info on locating setup programs for certain brands of PCs: http://www.firmware.com/support/bios/setupdsk.htm If this board needs an external setup program and you cannot locate the correct program for that system, we keep a generic Phoenix BIOS setup program on our website at: http://www.firmware.com/support/bios/setup.exe We provide no support on this program. It may not work on your system and it may possibly render the system unusable. If you get into trouble with this program, the solution may be to clear CMOS RAM. Some info on that can be found in this document: http://www.firmware.com/support/bios/cmosclr.htm If you are getting an error message concerning Phoenix Miser after installing or reformatting a hard drive on a notebook system with a Phoenix BIOS: We do not sell or support PHDISK. You would need to contact the notebook manufacturer for any help. For some additional info, see: http://www.phoenix.com/support/notebook.html#Q1.6 We have no BIOS upgrades for any notebook systems. We have no information on any notebook systems. We sell no products for any notebook systems. Many other topics are addressed in technical documents on our website at: http://www.firmware.com/support/ If you are a Micro Firmware customer and have a question or need some help with a product purchased from us, please email us at [EMAIL PROTECTED] or call us at 405-321-8333. If you are not a Micro
Problems with pppoe(pppd)
Hello. I am having a realy weird problem with pppoe. My linux router (debian 3.0 woody) keeps droping my internet connection when under heavy load. By heavy load I mean 200k downlink and 30k+ uplink with a lot of open connections(500+) which ussualy happens when running some sort of p2p client... I tried to simulate the sam load when dialing with my windows machine and the link did not drop Here is the c/p from syslog: Mar 17 19:42:46 gw pppoe[6846]: send (sendPacket): No buffer space available Mar 17 19:42:46 gw pppd[209]: Modem hangup Mar 17 19:42:46 gw pppd[209]: Connection terminated. Mar 17 19:42:46 gw pppd[209]: Connect time .6 minutes. Mar 17 19:42:46 gw pppd[209]: Sent 1370554759 bytes, received 2927735986 bytes. Mar 17 19:43:16 gw pppd[209]: Serial connection established. Mar 17 19:43:16 gw pppd[209]: Using interface ppp0 Mar 17 19:43:16 gw pppd[209]: Connect: ppp0 -- /dev/pts/0 Mar 17 19:43:17 gw pppoe[7396]: PADS: Service-Name: '' Mar 17 19:43:17 gw pppoe[7396]: PPP session is 1517 Mar 17 19:43:20 gw pppd[209]: PAP authentication failed Mar 17 19:43:20 gw pppd[209]: Connection terminated. Mar 17 19:43:20 gw pppoe[7396]: read (asyncReadFromPPP): Input/output error Mar 17 19:43:20 gw pppoe[7396]: Sent PADT Mar 17 19:43:50 gw pppd[209]: Serial connection established. Mar 17 19:43:50 gw pppd[209]: Using interface ppp0 Mar 17 19:43:50 gw pppd[209]: Connect: ppp0 -- /dev/pts/1 Mar 17 19:43:50 gw pppoe[7405]: PADS: Service-Name: '' Mar 17 19:43:50 gw pppoe[7405]: PPP session is 1519 Mar 17 19:43:54 gw pppd[209]: PAP authentication failed Mar 17 19:43:54 gw pppd[209]: Connection terminated. Mar 17 19:43:54 gw pppoe[7405]: read (asyncReadFromPPP): Input/output error Mar 17 19:43:54 gw pppoe[7405]: Sent PADT Mar 17 19:44:24 gw pppd[209]: Serial connection established. Mar 17 19:44:24 gw pppd[209]: Using interface ppp0 Mar 17 19:44:24 gw pppd[209]: Connect: ppp0 -- /dev/pts/1 Mar 17 19:44:24 gw pppoe[7422]: PADS: Service-Name: '' Mar 17 19:44:24 gw pppoe[7422]: PPP session is 1521 Mar 17 19:44:27 gw pppd[209]: PAP authentication failed Mar 17 19:44:27 gw pppd[209]: Connection terminated. Mar 17 19:44:27 gw pppoe[7422]: read (asyncReadFromPPP): Input/output error Mar 17 19:44:27 gw pppoe[7422]: Sent PADT Mar 17 19:44:57 gw pppd[209]: Serial connection established. Mar 17 19:44:57 gw pppd[209]: Using interface ppp0 Mar 17 19:44:57 gw pppd[209]: Connect: ppp0 -- /dev/pts/1 Mar 17 19:44:57 gw pppoe[7442]: PADS: Service-Name: '' Mar 17 19:44:57 gw pppoe[7442]: PPP session is 1522 Mar 17 19:45:01 gw pppd[209]: PAP authentication failed Mar 17 19:45:01 gw pppd[209]: Connection terminated. Mar 17 19:45:01 gw pppoe[7442]: read (asyncReadFromPPP): Input/output error Mar 17 19:45:01 gw pppoe[7442]: Sent PADT Mar 17 19:45:31 gw pppd[209]: Serial connection established. Mar 17 19:45:31 gw pppd[209]: Using interface ppp0 Mar 17 19:45:31 gw pppd[209]: Connect: ppp0 -- /dev/pts/1 Mar 17 19:45:31 gw pppoe[7454]: PADS: Service-Name: '' Mar 17 19:45:31 gw pppoe[7454]: PPP session is 1524 Mar 17 19:45:35 gw pppd[209]: Cannot determine ethernet address for proxy ARP Mar 17 19:45:35 gw pppd[209]: local IP address 193.95.243.xxx Mar 17 19:45:35 gw pppd[209]: remote IP address 213.250.19.90 Mar 17 19:45:35 gw pppd[209]: primary DNS address 193.189.160.11 Mar 17 19:45:35 gw pppd[209]: secondary DNS address 193.189.160.12 As you can see from the syslog after some time the link is re-established.. Any clues why is this happening or how to fix it? Best regards Ales
Re: LinkWalker
I have this same robot on my site. Can i Block this robot using .htaccess files..??? Chris http://www.truefootball.com http://www.worldofjerseys.com
