Re: Internet Connection - Load Balancing and Failover
On 11/13/12 08:57, Tomas Bodzar wrote: On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 11:09 PM, Walter Netowsouz...@gmail.com wrote: Hello guys, I have two internet connections, and I want to make load balancing and failover service, I had read about pf load balancing and multi-path route, what is the difference between them. Which is the better to use in my scenario? And for failover, the best solution is ifstated(8)? One of the possible approaches, but maybe easier for you will be http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/man.cgi?query=trunkapropos=0sektion=0manpath=OpenBSD+Currentarch=i386format=html I have been under impression that man trunk is for L2 redundancy. Could you elaborate how it would help to load balance and fail over between two different ISPs uplinks (one link per isp, i assume they have different ip configurations)? Imre thanks in advance. Walter Neto
Re: Building OpenConnect with libintl
On Fri, 2012-11-09 at 12:19 +0100, Marc Espie wrote: autocrap is part of the problem, not the solution. Their documentation concerning version numbering, and all the fuzz they add around it don't help at all. The old style (major.minor) is fairly simple to understand and to use, actually, as long as you don't try to play fucked up games with it. I've committed a patch to make it use -version-info on OpenBSD, and -version-number with GNU libtool. They seem to do the same thing, taking the sane ABI-version numbers that I give them, and putting them directly in the filename of the resulting library. http://git.infradead.org/users/dwmw2/openconnect.git/commitdiff/ada3dea0 I note you don't seem to have an soname â so if I add functions to libopenconnect and bump the minor release number, I think your GNOME and KDE authentication dialogs for the VPN are going to break. If you update OpenConnect and not rebuild those, of course. I appreciate you say you don't. But OpenConnect might occasionally have required security or compatibility upgrades, so users might want to. Does that mean I should actually make it just '-version-info @APIMAJOR@' and drop the ':@APIMINOR@' part for OpenBSD? -- Sent with MeeGo's ActiveSync support. David WoodhouseOpen Source Technology Centre david.woodho...@intel.com Intel Corporation [demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type application/x-pkcs7-signature which had a name of smime.p7s]
Re: Internet Connection - Load Balancing and Failover
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht- An: OpenBSD-misc list misc@openbsd.org; Von:Imre Oolberg i...@auul.pri.ee Gesendet: Di 13.11.2012 09:05 Betreff:Re: Internet Connection - Load Balancing and Failover On 11/13/12 08:57, Tomas Bodzar wrote: On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 11:09 PM, Walter Netowsouz...@gmail.com wrote: Hello guys, I have two internet connections, and I want to make load balancing and failover service, I had read about pf load balancing and multi-path route, what is the difference between them. Which is the better to use in my scenario? And for failover, the best solution is ifstated(8)? One of the possible approaches, but maybe easier for you will be http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/man.cgi?query=trunkapropos=0sektion=0manpath=O penBSD+Currentarch=i386format=html I have been under impression that man trunk is for L2 redundancy. Could you elaborate how it would help to load balance and fail over between two different ISPs uplinks (one link per isp, i assume they have different ip configurations)? Imre thanks in advance. Walter Neto Hi Imre, take a look at the router section of relayd.conf: http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/man.cgi?query=relayd.confapropos=0sektion=0manpath=OpenBSD+Currentarch=i386format=html Regards Uwe
Re: Unified BSD?
On 12 Nov 2012, at 21:37 , Robin Björklin robin.bjork...@gmail.com wrote: Am I bat crap crazy for thinking it could be good to merge the four largest BSD variants out there, take the best bits and pieces out of each and create a Unified BSD? You'd end up creating a fifth. .tsooJ -- The first testicular guard, the cup, was used in hockey in 1874; the first helmet was used in 1974. That means it only took 100 years for men to realize that their brain is also important. -- Joost van de Griek http://www.jvdg.net/
Re: Internet Connection - Load Balancing and Failover
Hello, I don't think that trunk is appropriate for this scenario. It is use for OSI level 2 (Ethernet) fail over and/or load balancing but won't be able to load balance traffic between two internet connection, witch involve TCP/IP load balancing. Tomas Bodzar tomas.bod...@gmail.com a écrit : On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 11:09 PM, Walter Neto wsouz...@gmail.com wrote: Hello guys, I have two internet connections, and I want to make load balancing and failover service, I had read about pf load balancing and multi-path route, what is the difference between them. Which is the better to use in my scenario? And for failover, the best solution is ifstated(8)? One of the possible approaches, but maybe easier for you will be http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/man.cgi?query=trunkapropos=0sektion=0manpath=OpenBSD+Currentarch=i386format=html thanks in advance. Walter Neto
Re: Unified BSD?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 2012/11/13 7:14 AM, Mike. wrote: If your goal is to please as many people as possible, then compromise is the way to go. If your goal is to produce outstanding software then, well, you're gonna have to piss off a few people. Could not agree more! - -- Wayn0 Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJQohrUAAoJENzqTnPMiNZlOkkH+wdmcX12a68IiZEWgPxe/Suf apxY870GQVBQrqfLzlIFBSY/Le7aQWssmHhEx//GvmYcpQYgkwU12Yjzj5HHYmsg SrLP7qQA7L22R1h9MKtQAKo7+6EW6cRxa80oKIFK/+hxuPPMUyr8eApnyozU20sJ YN7ISZfuf7yTyUo3fI04sqltnKrhLcmbS3oYqiDdPchVvHkpSXFWYk2vbVDk7kRY QsMHaFHeltMmALhUCy1Jq97DVSCQ0n/Mb3oJR+7UcdF5dRbWZhTGO4FVpkf6FChj 7kaJeTM4mmps3bXSqu5yW9loD0mlhOKqRSSBhtqtdj9I4FUUgRFLWFJK1L68fPA= =9kra -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: Best Performance Server Strategy(Probably OBSD OffTopic)
Where i wrote listen i really meant accept. On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 9:04 PM, Friedrich Locke friedrich.lo...@gmail.comwrote: Hi folks, i am planning to write a simple web server. My initial ideia for this server is that it will only serve static content. So, i would like to have the best possible performance. I don't feel like going for multiple process since i would like to reduce context switch required by multiple process send data to clients. I would like to implement it using kqueue. On a single cpu/core machine it is fairly simple to solve, but when in SMP/multicore machines i could take two approaches (Suppose we have n cores in the system): First approach: A connection multiplexer process listens for incoming connections on port tcp/80. When i new connection arrives it (the process) accepts it (the new connection) and sends the fd from the incoming connection to one of the n http server process instances and from that point on the http server process handles it. Second approach: Starts a http server process. This process opens a socket for listening incoming connection on port tcp/80. Than, this process forks n-1 processes. These n-1 process will share the listening socket and starts listening to this socket too. When a new connection arrives, the kernel wakes up one of the n proccess and this one handles the incoming connection. While this process is serving a request, we will have n-1 process listening and if a new connection arrives the kernel wakes up one of the n-1 process and do everything again and again I am no OpenBSD kernerl expert. I would like to hear from which of the approaches would deliver better performance (this is critical for me). What you have to say. Thanks a lot for your time and cooperation. Best regards, Fried.
Re: Unified BSD?
- Then came the Unix wars, where ATT sued BSDI (a commercial variant that no longer exists) over perceived copyright infringement. The free BSDs weren't really directly involved, but the suit would have been just as relevant, and people were worried. This was the time that Linux was in the ascendancy. Users had the choice of a free GPL system or one which might land them in trouble. Most chose the safe option. I know the view from Germany as to why Linux was taken up so readily, most people read about it later, repeat relayed wisdom, but I was here know: ( BTW though I'm British but in Germany, Germany is far more signifcant in this regard than eg UK of GB, eg Linux mag. has 3 times the circulation in Germany as UK, whenever I'm in UK I never see Linux mags in book shops etc ( of course no BSD) just MS, whereas here in Munich there's some choice of Linux mags, even in food supermarket (Tengelmann) I recall. Most newbies were clueless or didnt give a toss about FSF v BSD licensing then (or now), or some firm called ATT across the pond breathing hot air. (Only us BSD people cared, not many of us). Old Unix hands like me were earning good money fully employed doing consultancy, (plenty of work then). Although I thought I maybe should help spread BSD, considered knocking out batches of 30/40+ floppies per mail order, it was Very unattractive, labour intensive formatting, dd'ing, checking for media errors, at a very low pay rate compare with mich higher paid more interesting consultancy. Plus also if one did that under German tax law (I checked with my Steuer Berater = accountant I recall) it would be subject to Gewerbe Steuer, not just for the trivial amount earned on floppies shipped, but could imperil imposing the extra tax on the Whole of consultancy income, Very Expensive mistake to risk that. So I didn't others didnt; most other consultant friends here were also happy earning at commercial rates, didn't want to touch floppy reproduction. BUT ... meanwhile there was a whole new load of students on low or no income, no tax issues to worry about, young student mode enthusiasm time to evangalise their new free software ... Linux ... so one saw adverts for stack of floppies in eg CT Magazine (http://www.heise.de/ct/ others. then CDs came on the scene, even easier for the students to push out again I wondered whether I should push out some BSD CDs, again colleagues were too busy to reduce their consultancy income by doing grunt disk jockey work producing mailing CDROMs at cheap prices. Again I was scared of German Gewerbe Steuer ... So I decided to just do software bundling (safe consultancy work) let a commercial firm do manufacture, bulk distrib, German language correspondence, German gewerbe Steuer issues etc - Ughh) So I mastered a combination Live + Install FreeBSD CDROM years before freebsd.org did theirs, approached german Linux Mag Heise (I think) (English language, German based) BSD Mag (whatever, the one from Rosa Riebl) to see if anyone would bundle it stuck to front page of magazines (to really shift a lot have BSD make a big impact in the OS scene. I didnt get anywhere with that, but I got further with Dr Dobbs USA mag, negotiations were going OK, then they decided it would be too expensive to glue a CD on each cover, they just wanted to feature my CD in their library of CDs for sale ... at which point I lost interest cos: - It would fail to impact the market if not sent in bulk 1 per mag. (I'd have accepted very low payment for that, as it would have helped push BSD significantly) - If not on Mag. cover just in library for sale per individual order, I was scared of low sales, not worth the bother to polish the master maintain it maybe through new releases for low income. Actually, I still see a market opportunity for someone: For BSD (or Linux) shipped on memory sticks. But I wont touch that, especially not in Germany with this tax system, having to deal with thousands of customers at low profit per unit, plus a lot of german correspondence (German grammar not nice IMO) ... but its still a market BSD or Linux students could exploit (if not already ... I havent read CT mag ads. lately to know if it's being done). Cheers, Julian -- Julian Stacey, BSD Unix Linux C Sys Eng Consultant, Munich http://berklix.com Reply below not above, like a play script. Indent old text with . Send plain text. Not: HTML, multipart/alternative, base64, quoted-printable.
Re: Internet Connection - Load Balancing and Failover
On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 11:09 PM, Walter Neto wsouz...@gmail.com wrote: Hello guys, I have two internet connections, and I want to make load balancing and failover service, I had read about pf load balancing and multi-path route, what is the difference between them. Which is the better to use in my scenario? And for failover, the best solution is ifstated(8)? thanks in advance. http://www.openbsd.org/faq/faq6.html#Multipath http://www.openbsd.org/faq/pf/pools.html#outgoing
fbtab(5) and X11
Hi, Just a question about fbtab(5) and X11. In the distributed /etc/fbtab (under i386, -current) the file contains: # $OpenBSD: fbtab.head,v 1.2 1999/05/05 06:56:34 deraadt Exp $ # login(1) reads this file to determine which devices should be chown'd to # the new user. Format is: # login-tty permdevice:[device]:... /dev/ttyC0 0600 /dev/console:/dev/wskbd:/dev/wskbd0:/dev/wsmouse:/dev/wsmouse0:/dev/ttyCcfg /dev/X0 0600/dev/wsmouse:/dev/wsmouse0 # samples #/dev/ttyC0 0600/dev/fd0 With it, login(1) do the right thing when login on ttyC0 (all devs listed in ttyC0 line are owned by logged user). But I couldn't acheve the same thing under X11 (login with xdm). x11$ ls -l /dev/wsmouse0 crw--- 1 root wheel 68, 0 Oct 14 14:25 /dev/wsmouse0 A grep -Rl in /usr/xenocara for login_fbtab(3) found nothing... So does fbtab is implemented for local X11 connection (with xdm) ? And if not, what is the purpose of /dev/X0 in /etc/fbtab ? The initial purpose is to own some devices like cd0a or ttyU0 when login under X11. Thanks. -- Sebastien Marie
Re: Unified BSD?
I just can't resist the urge to point to this comic strip, which an other FreeBSD users posted regarding : hey let's create a FreeBSD desktop, like Ubuntu did with Unity http://xkcd.com/927/ -- -- Joar Jegleim Homepage: http://cosmicb.no Linkedin: http://no.linkedin.com/in/joarjegleim fb: http://www.facebook.com/joar.jegleim AKA: CosmicB @Freenode -- On 12 November 2012 21:37, Robin Björklin robin.bjork...@gmail.com wrote: Hi! First and foremost I'd like to present myself, I'm a young and naive junior sys admin that think people should be able to compromise and see the bigger picture and the good of the cause. Now over to the reason for my post. As all of you probably know there's a lot of buzz around Gnu/Linux these days and I'm pretty sure you couldn't care less. What I'm wondering is why the BSD community which from what I can gather isn't as big as the Linux community have decided to split their resources into several different projects/forks/distributions. To me it seems *BSD would be in a more competitive shape if all developers would get in under one roof? Am I bat crap crazy for thinking it could be good to merge the four largest BSD variants out there, take the best bits and pieces out of each and create a Unified BSD? Kind Regards, Robin Bjorklin ___ freebsd-c...@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-chat To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-chat-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Gdm and Gnome with OpenBSD 5.2
2012/11/12 Antoine Jacoutot ajacou...@bsdfrog.org On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 09:40:51PM +0100, Jean-François SIMON wrote: Dear all, I am sorry, I can't work out finding gdm or running Gnome with OpenBSD 5.2, could someone please send a link or some informations ? I used to have it working before, just now I would like xdm to launch gnome but starting gnome-session ends up with various errors and back to xdm console. Sorry again and thanks for help # pkg_add gnome Then read this: /usr/local/share/doc/pkg-readmes/gnome-* If it still fails, provide error messages.. -- Antoine Perfect !
Re: Unified BSD?
No offense Ignatios Souvatzis but your reference to Minix being a 7th BSD distro is like saying FreeBSD (or any of the other major BSDs) is another Linux because of its inter-compatibility for certain user-land components and various shared code. Minix has a minimal amount of NetBSD code and most of it being userland tools and package management. The actual core of Minix is totally different to NetBSD; MINIX is a microkernel and NetBSD is a monolithic kernel being a major difference. Mac OS X i can understand but again the core of OSX is based of Mach 3, FreeBSD and OPENSTEP, with a lot of modified code (more like BSD's 2nd or 3rd cousin). Although with that i suppose it depends on how you are defining what classifies as a BSD distribution. If your going of whether they have used any source from BSD then your going to be hard-pressed to classify one that isn't BSD. However, i was assuming you were going of the core of the system (i.e. how much source if any is used in kernel space). Which brings be back to what i was talking about in an earlier post. If you want to make a unified BSD, it would be easier to create a new BSD which at the core (i.e. memory management, IPC, I/O, etc...) is based of per-say NetBSD, i only chose NetBSD because it has what i believe is cleaner code than the others, and is structured in a way that would make it easier to modify and move components. Sure it wouldn't be true to the roots of an actual unified BSD that is based of 4.4BSD lite and has a mesh core of OpenBSD, FreeBSD NetBSD, but my point isn't about 4.4BSD lite or creating a true unified BSD down to the core (where all BSD developers work on one project). My point is about the possibility of creating a new BSD project (with separate developers) that aims for 100% compatibility with at least FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD and maybe DragonflyBSD. Your suggestion i would think is possible, but only by being realistic about it. Using an already stable kernel and then modifying it where necessary to make it compatible. lol, that's just my 2-cents about it. Hell the idea is more possible with the BSDs than it is with Linux. I wouldn't even consider trying to create a unified Linux. Linux is such a jumbled mess, that i wouldn't want to go anywhere near a project trying to un-jumble it with a 10ft pole, as it would take about as long to un-jumble it as it would to finish the same idea on BSD. I like Linux but if your talking about a project/s being unified, BSD is leaps and bounds ahead of Linux. So while Linux is doing better in terms of popularity, BSD has a far greater potential for more than Linux, just because each project has made such a strong base foundation and is so well organized. :D On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 9:45 PM, Ignatios Souvatzis ignat...@cs.uni-bonn.de wrote: On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 10:08:08AM +0100, Joost van de Griek wrote: On 12 Nov 2012, at 21:37 , Robin Björklin robin.bjork...@gmail.com wrote: Am I bat crap crazy for thinking it could be good to merge the four largest BSD variants out there, take the best bits and pieces out of each and create a Unified BSD? You'd end up creating a fifth. At least a sixth, IIRC. You left out MirBSD from your distribution list. Also, you could argue that Minix, with its NetBSD compatibility, is a seventh and MacOS-X, with its partially (Free-/Net-)BSD compatible userland, an eighth. -is
Re: Unified BSD?
On 2012-11-13 11:45, Ignatios Souvatzis wrote: On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 10:08:08AM +0100, Joost van de Griek wrote: On 12 Nov 2012, at 21:37 , Robin Björklin robin.bjork...@gmail.com wrote: Am I bat crap crazy for thinking it could be good to merge the four largest BSD variants out there, take the best bits and pieces out of each and create a Unified BSD? You'd end up creating a fifth. At least a sixth, IIRC. You left out MirBSD from your distribution list. Also, you could argue that Minix, with its NetBSD compatibility, is a seventh and MacOS-X, with its partially (Free-/Net-)BSD compatible userland, an eighth. And what about 2BSD, BSD 3 and BSD 4 with all their releases? (And I assume that there was probably something that in retrospect would have been called 1BSD as well...) Johnny
Re: Unified BSD?
On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 10:08:08AM +0100, Joost van de Griek wrote: On 12 Nov 2012, at 21:37 , Robin Björklin robin.bjork...@gmail.com wrote: Am I bat crap crazy for thinking it could be good to merge the four largest BSD variants out there, take the best bits and pieces out of each and create a Unified BSD? You'd end up creating a fifth. At least a sixth, IIRC. You left out MirBSD from your distribution list. Also, you could argue that Minix, with its NetBSD compatibility, is a seventh and MacOS-X, with its partially (Free-/Net-)BSD compatible userland, an eighth. -is
Re: Unified BSD?
On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 01:04:27PM +0100, Lars Engels wrote: MirBSD / MirOS is dead: http://www.freshbsd.org/search?project=mirbsd Last commit: 2011-08-29 23:00:00 I'm no Mir* co-worker, so take this with a grain of salt. But on general principles: a) I question the date itself - that's the last commit to whatever freshbsd.org watches, not necessarily the last thing the developers did. (In fact, I've heard from Thorsten at FrosCon that he does definitely not consider his project abandoned.) b) Besides - I question the notion of unchanging == dead. In fact, as somebody who *uses* software, and who administeres computers for others who want to *use* the software, I consider changing software - e.g. the fortnightly changes of Firefox-Current's user interface - a nuisance. (That's why Mozilla has their extended support release, currently 10.0.9.) People want to use software for some work, not spend half of their time rewriting configuration files or relearn key bidings or menu entry positions. (Now, nobody being there who looks at bug reports etc... thats something different. But you only see changes through this activity if there really *are* bugs.) -is
Re: Unified BSD?
Yes, your bat crap crazy :-) All of these variants inherit from the same unified BSD 4.4 base code as far as I know. So years ago there were reasons that groups wanted to spilt off and focus on specific goals. Some of these goals are mutually exclusive. These BSD variants are not really competing with each other or Linux for that matter. Justin Mayes -Original Message- From: owner-m...@openbsd.org [mailto:owner-m...@openbsd.org] On Behalf Of Robin Björklin Sent: Monday, November 12, 2012 2:38 PM To: us...@dragonflybsd.org; netbsd-us...@netbsd.org; freebsd-c...@freebsd.org; misc@openbsd.org Subject: Unified BSD? Hi! First and foremost I'd like to present myself, I'm a young and naive junior sys admin that think people should be able to compromise and see the bigger picture and the good of the cause. Now over to the reason for my post. As all of you probably know there's a lot of buzz around Gnu/Linux these days and I'm pretty sure you couldn't care less. What I'm wondering is why the BSD community which from what I can gather isn't as big as the Linux community have decided to split their resources into several different projects/forks/distributions. To me it seems *BSD would be in a more competitive shape if all developers would get in under one roof? Am I bat crap crazy for thinking it could be good to merge the four largest BSD variants out there, take the best bits and pieces out of each and create a Unified BSD? Kind Regards, Robin Bjorklin [demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type application/pkcs7-signature which had a name of smime.p7s]
Re: ath or ral?
After some more researching, I found interesting idea for 8 years old laptop: realtek rtl8191su inside d-link dwa-131 adapter. http://www.undeadly.org/cgi?action=articlesid=20101216231634 My thinkering is that usb adapter uses less power than pcmcia. The driver is rsu. Laptop is HP nx9020 with 2 usb ports: none2@pci0:0:29:0: class=0x0c0300 card=0x3084103c chip=0x24c28086 rev=0x03 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'Intel Corporation' device = '82801DB/DBL/DBM (ICH4/ICH4-L/ICH4-M) USB UHCI Controller *1' class = serial bus subclass = USB none3@pci0:0:29:1: class=0x0c0300 card=0x3084103c chip=0x24c48086 rev=0x03 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'Intel Corporation' device = '82801DB/DBL/DBM (ICH4/ICH4-L/ICH4-M) USB UHCI Controller *2' class = serial bus subclass = USB none4@pci0:0:29:2: class=0x0c0300 card=0x3084103c chip=0x24c78086 rev=0x03 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'Intel Corporation' device = '82801DB/DBL/DBM (ICH4/ICH4-L/ICH4-M) USB UHCI Controller *3' class = serial bus subclass = USB none5@pci0:0:29:7: class=0x0c0320 card=0x3084103c chip=0x24cd8086 rev=0x03 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'Intel Corporation' device = '82801DB/DBL/DBM (ICH4/ICH4-L/ICH4-M) USB 2.0 EHCI Controller' class = serial bus I assume usb is able to power this adapter and run at sufficient speed? Is this good idea at all? Best regards Zoran
Re: Unified BSD?
On 13 November 2012 07:04, Lars Engels lars.eng...@0x20.net wrote: On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 11:45:11AM +0100, Ignatios Souvatzis wrote: On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 10:08:08AM +0100, Joost van de Griek wrote: On 12 Nov 2012, at 21:37 , Robin Björklin robin.bjork...@gmail.com wrote: Am I bat crap crazy for thinking it could be good to merge the four largest BSD variants out there, take the best bits and pieces out of each and create a Unified BSD? You'd end up creating a fifth. At least a sixth, IIRC. You left out MirBSD from your distribution list. Also, you could argue that Minix, with its NetBSD compatibility, is a seventh and MacOS-X, with its partially (Free-/Net-)BSD compatible userland, an eighth. MirBSD / MirOS is dead: http://www.freshbsd.org/search?project=mirbsd Last commit: 2011-08-29 23:00:00 Latest looks like 20120911 via http://www.mirbsd.org/MirOS/current/ Also, mksh (I use this on gentoo) jupp (a fork of joe: I still use the ol jstar for word processing) are both regularly worked upon. In any case (getting back to the Original Troll), the various BSD projects regularly borrow code from each other, so I hardly see the point. -- --
Re: Unified BSD?
On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 2:45 AM, Ignatios Souvatzis ignat...@cs.uni-bonn.de wrote: At least a sixth, IIRC. You left out MirBSD from your distribution list. Also, you could argue that Minix, with its NetBSD compatibility, is a seventh and MacOS-X, with its partially (Free-/Net-)BSD compatible userland, an eighth. OS X has benefitted greatly from FreeBSD, Apple hiring former FreeBSD core team members. And indirectly from OpenBSD as well, with modern versions of OS X, 10.7+, have pf. Cross pollination is a huge benefit to the BSD community.
Re: Internet Connection - Load Balancing and Failover
On 11/13/12 08:39, Pierre Marchal wrote: Hello, I don't think that trunk is appropriate for this scenario. It is use for OSI level 2 (Ethernet) fail over and/or load balancing but won't be able to load balance traffic between two internet connection, witch involve TCP/IP load balancing. You might try haproxy. pkg_add haproxy man HAPROXY(1) -- Udo
Re: Unified BSD?
The Unified BSD idea is as crazy as the decision to split this discussion on multiple lists. I've quit reading this, but I got the Nick's insights, nice and touching as always.
openldap
Hi, i remenber when installing (after building it from /usr/ports/database/opendap) openldap the scripts in patch directory create user _openldap and the group too. Now i cannot see any reference to the user/group openldap server process will run as ? Isn't it necessary anymore ? I mean, doesn't the installing procedure create user/group entries anymore ? Thanks a lot.
Re: Unified BSD?
I know the basic history of all the BSDs and the reasons for divergence, but I've always tended to think of them as different focus areas of a single project. The best ideas tend to get shared around, where applicable, but each retains its unique focus and niche within the greater whole. We don't need a unified BSD; BSD is already unified in the ways that matter. Open source and meritocracy see to that. Tim -- Tim Larson Software Engineer [Proxibid]http://www.proxibid.com/ e: tim.lar...@proxibid.com p: 877-505-7770 d: 402-505-7770 This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify by return email. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. Warning: Although the company has taken reasonable precautions to ensure no viruses are present in this email, no assurance or warranty is given that this email and any attachments are free of viruses.
Re: Unified BSD?
On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 11:45:11AM +0100, Ignatios Souvatzis wrote: On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 10:08:08AM +0100, Joost van de Griek wrote: On 12 Nov 2012, at 21:37 , Robin Björklin robin.bjork...@gmail.com wrote: Am I bat crap crazy for thinking it could be good to merge the four largest BSD variants out there, take the best bits and pieces out of each and create a Unified BSD? You'd end up creating a fifth. At least a sixth, IIRC. You left out MirBSD from your distribution list. Nice. And it's not April the first yet.
LAN - LAN via External IP
I'm trying to find the cleanest solution for correct routing of internal LAN
servers to the external IP's of other servers in the same LAN.
I have read the OpenBSD FAQ here
(http://www.openbsd.org/faq/pf/rdr.html#reflect ) and mostly understand the
problems associated with doing this via some relatively simple firewall
rule. The purpose of this is to simplify the logic in our pf rules a bit
where we have redirects/nat for the internal LAN clients (see below) but
also to allow access to internal services without always editing /etc/hosts.
I'm wondering what people think the cleanest way of accomplishing this is?
The split view DNS seems like kind of an extra management hassle and a good
opportunity to screw something up. But running a proxy and the added rules
in pf doesn't seem like a great solution either.
Also, is there some catch all that could be created with rules like this?
Currently we are using this on specific services when we want to be able to
use the fqdn on a local server without adding the internal ip resolution to
/etc/hosts:
rdr pass on {$ext_if, $int_if} inet proto tcp from any to $mx4_ext port 25
- $mx4_int port 25
nat on $int_if inet proto tcp from 192.168.1.0/24 to $mx4_int port 25 -
$int_if
It has the very much less than ideal result of showing the connection coming
from the firewall internal interface though, which makes it harder to know
where incoming connections are really coming from in the logs and such.
Anyways. Any thoughts?
Re: Internet Connection - Load Balancing and Failover
Hi, I've read the other replies and there's no need to install any port. Like mentioned before, just use relayd(8) from base with the router option in relayd.conf(5) in combination with multipath routing (sysctl net.inet.ip.multipath=1). You can also use pf with route-to or rtable as a classifier for outbound traffic (eg. send SSH traffic over uplink A, Web traffic over uplink B). Reyk Am Montag, 12. November 2012 schrieb Walter Neto : Hello guys, I have two internet connections, and I want to make load balancing and failover service, I had read about pf load balancing and multi-path route, what is the difference between them. Which is the better to use in my scenario? And for failover, the best solution is ifstated(8)? thanks in advance. Walter Neto
Re: Unified BSD?
On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 3:37 PM, Robin Björklin robin.bjork...@gmail.com wrote: Hi! First and foremost I'd like to present myself, I'm a young and naive junior sys admin that think people should be able to compromise and see the bigger picture and the good of the cause. Now over to the reason for my post. As all of you probably know there's a lot of buzz around Gnu/Linux these days and I'm pretty sure you couldn't care less. What I'm wondering is why the BSD community which from what I can gather isn't as big as the Linux community have decided to split their resources into several different projects/forks/distributions. To me it seems *BSD would be in a more competitive shape if all developers would get in under one roof? Am I bat crap crazy for thinking it could be good to merge the four largest BSD variants out there, take the best bits and pieces out of each and create a Unified BSD? Kind Regards, Robin Bjorklin Model yourself after Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino who was involved in Net, Open, and Free BSD. If you are interested in generating linux-like buzz advocate hardware manufacturers and industry types to fund (with money) development of drivers. Matt
Re: LAN - LAN via External IP
On 2012-11-13, James Chase ja...@wintercastle.net wrote:
Also, is there some catch all that could be created with rules like this?
Currently we are using this on specific services when we want to be able to
use the fqdn on a local server without adding the internal ip resolution to
/etc/hosts:
rdr pass on {$ext_if, $int_if} inet proto tcp from any to $mx4_ext port 25
- $mx4_int port 25
nat on $int_if inet proto tcp from 192.168.1.0/24 to $mx4_int port 25 -
$int_if
You don't need to specify port numbers if you want it to apply to
every port.
It has the very much less than ideal result of showing the connection coming
from the firewall internal interface though, which makes it harder to know
where incoming connections are really coming from in the logs and such.
No way around this without some type of split-horizon DNS. If you're
redirecting, the packets *must* go back to the device doing that
translation otherwise the return packets from server-client will
have the wrong source address so the client will ignore them.
I usually try and put machines hosting rdr'd services on a separate
subnet to avoid this.. In cases where this isn't practical I usually
override the host records on a local name resolver.
Re: Unified BSD?
Hi, Reference: From: Johnny Billquist b...@update.uu.se Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 13:34:56 +0100 Message-id: 50a23e70.8010...@update.uu.se Johnny Billquist wrote: On 2012-11-13 11:45, Ignatios Souvatzis wrote: On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 10:08:08AM +0100, Joost van de Griek wrote: On 12 Nov 2012, at 21:37 , Robin Björklin robin.bjork...@gmail.com wrote: Am I bat crap crazy for thinking it could be good to merge the four largest BSD variants out there, take the best bits and pieces out of each and create a Unified BSD? You'd end up creating a fifth. At least a sixth, IIRC. You left out MirBSD from your distribution list. Also, you could argue that Minix, with its NetBSD compatibility, is a seventh and MacOS-X, with its partially (Free-/Net-)BSD compatible userland, an eighth. And what about 2BSD, BSD 3 and BSD 4 with all their releases? (And I assume that there was probably something that in retrospect would have been called 1BSD as well...) Johnny No they were sequential from same team, not later parallel forks. Cheers, Julian -- Julian Stacey, BSD Unix Linux C Sys Eng Consultant, Munich http://berklix.com Reply below not above, like a play script. Indent old text with . Send plain text. Not: HTML, multipart/alternative, base64, quoted-printable.
Re: Unified BSD?
On 2012-11-13 18:51, Julian H. Stacey wrote: Hi, Reference: From: Johnny Billquist b...@update.uu.se Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 13:34:56 +0100 Message-id: 50a23e70.8010...@update.uu.se Johnny Billquist wrote: On 2012-11-13 11:45, Ignatios Souvatzis wrote: On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 10:08:08AM +0100, Joost van de Griek wrote: On 12 Nov 2012, at 21:37 , Robin Björklin robin.bjork...@gmail.com wrote: Am I bat crap crazy for thinking it could be good to merge the four largest BSD variants out there, take the best bits and pieces out of each and create a Unified BSD? You'd end up creating a fifth. At least a sixth, IIRC. You left out MirBSD from your distribution list. Also, you could argue that Minix, with its NetBSD compatibility, is a seventh and MacOS-X, with its partially (Free-/Net-)BSD compatible userland, an eighth. And what about 2BSD, BSD 3 and BSD 4 with all their releases? (And I assume that there was probably something that in retrospect would have been called 1BSD as well...) Johnny No they were sequential from same team, not later parallel forks. Not so fast... 2BSD and BSD 4 are definitely parallel, almost to this day, I'd say... Well, BSD 4 has been sortof dead for a number of years now, but 2BSD is not entirely so dead yet. And things were back- and forwardported between the two for a while. Johnny
Re: Vendor specific DHCP option codes
** Moved from sparc@ to misc@; reply-to's set **
On 2012/11/13 23:59, Kaya Saman wrote:
Hi,
I'm trying to migrate the dhcp configuration from within a Cisco
router to OpenBSD. So far everything has gone really smoothly and
basic things are working fine.
What I'm currently quite stuck with however is vendor specific option
codes I have a few Polycom IP phones which I used a handful of
codes with:
4, 7, 42, 66, 150, 151, 160
How do I add these into the dhcpd.conf file?
This isn't listed anywhere other than the source code,
/usr/src/usr.sbin/dhcpd/tables.c, but these are:-
4 time-servers
7 log-servers
42 ntp-servers
66 tftp-server-name
150 voip-configuration-server
151 option-151
160 option-160
dhcp-options(5) lists the names, but not the numbers.
Currently reading through the dhcp-options man page it suggests to add:
option option-66 HEX of IP address separated by :
The option-XX notation is only available for options which don't
already have a name.
Also note tftp-server-name is a text string not a hex IP address.
Unfortunately the syntax was wrong and produced an error.
How would I be able to add for example:
option 66 ip 10.10.10.10
??
So far I specified:
subnet 10.10.10.0 netmask 255.255.255.192{
option routers 10.10.10.1;
range 10.10.10.2 10.10.10.62;
}
which is all fine bar the options. unfortunately the web wasn't
any help as some places claimed to add:
option option-66 string;
to the top of the file then add the rest in the pool this however
also produced an error so I am out of ideas.
Regards,
Kaya
Re: Unified BSD?
yes, you are young, naïve, and 'bat crazy'/idealistic (never could find the difference between these two ;) ... but you are also quite lazy -- had you taken the time to research the history behind the forks and the current stated goals and objectives of each of these OS's, you would see why only a tiny minority of developers participate in more than one of the projects, and that despite the common ancestry and BSD philosophy, there are irreconcilable differences between all of the projects. On 12 Nov 2012 at 21:37, Robin Björklin wrote: Hi! First and foremost I'd like to present myself, I'm a young and naive junior sys admin that think people should be able to compromise and see the bigger picture and the good of the cause. Now over to the reason for my post. As all of you probably know there's a lot of buzz around Gnu/Linux these days and I'm pretty sure you couldn't care less. What I'm wondering is why the BSD community which from what I can gather isn't as big as the Linux community have decided to split their resources into several different projects/forks/distributions. To me it seems *BSD would be in a more competitive shape if all developers would get in under one roof? Am I bat crap crazy for thinking it could be good to merge the four largest BSD variants out there, take the best bits and pieces out of each and create a Unified BSD? Kind Regards, Robin Bjorklin
Noppoo Mini Choc 84 USB keyboard can not work correctly on OpenBSD 5.2 (loongson)
PLATFORM: Yeelong 2F 8089D OS: OpenBSD 5.2 stable PROBLEM: Noppoo Mini Choc 84 USB keyboard do not work correctly on my system. For exampIe, when I type Enter, but get 5 displayed on the screen. When I plug in my Noppoo Mini Choc 84 USB keyboard, the dmesg is: ukbd1 detached uhidev1 detached uhidev0 at uhub3 port 2 configuration 1 interface 0 vendor 0x1006 USB Keyboard rev 2.00/1.40 addr 2 uhidev0: iclass 3/1 ukbd0 at uhidev0: 64 variable keys, 0 key codes wskbd1 at ukbd0 mux 1 wskbd1: connecting to wsdisplay0 uhidev1 at uhub3 port 2 configuration 1 interface 1 vendor 0x1006 USB Keyboard rev 2.00/1.40 addr 2 uhidev1: iclass 3/0, 3 report ids uhid0 at uhidev1 reportid 1: input=2, output=0, feature=0 uhid1 at uhidev1 reportid 2: input=1, output=0, feature=0 ukbd1 at uhidev1 reportid 3: 56 variable keys, 0 key codes wskbd2 at ukbd1 mux 1 wskbd2: connecting to wsdisplay0 Another Logitech USB keyboard works well. Its dmesg is: uhidev0 at uhub3 port 2 configuration 1 interface 0 Logitech Logitech USB Keyboard rev 1.10/28.00 addr 2 uhidev0: iclass 3/1 ukbd0 at uhidev0: 8 variable keys, 6 key codes wskbd1 at ukbd0 mux 1 wskbd1: connecting to wsdisplay0 It seems that the OS detect two devices when I plugged in my Noppoo Mini Choc 84 USB keyboard. By the way, this Noppoo Mini Choc 84 USB keyboard works well on several diffirent linux distributions i ever used. Can any one help me? Thanks.
Re: Noppoo Mini Choc 84 USB keyboard can not work correctly on OpenBSD 5.2 (loongson)
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 6:19 AM, yunplusplus yunplusp...@163.com wrote: PLATFORM: Yeelong 2F 8089D OS: OpenBSD 5.2 stable PROBLEM: Noppoo Mini Choc 84 USB keyboard do not work correctly on my system. For exampIe, when I type Enter, but get 5 displayed on the screen. When I plug in my Noppoo Mini Choc 84 USB keyboard, the dmesg is: ukbd1 detached uhidev1 detached uhidev0 at uhub3 port 2 configuration 1 interface 0 vendor 0x1006 USB Keyboard rev 2.00/1.40 addr 2 uhidev0: iclass 3/1 ukbd0 at uhidev0: 64 variable keys, 0 key codes wskbd1 at ukbd0 mux 1 wskbd1: connecting to wsdisplay0 uhidev1 at uhub3 port 2 configuration 1 interface 1 vendor 0x1006 USB Keyboard rev 2.00/1.40 addr 2 uhidev1: iclass 3/0, 3 report ids uhid0 at uhidev1 reportid 1: input=2, output=0, feature=0 uhid1 at uhidev1 reportid 2: input=1, output=0, feature=0 ukbd1 at uhidev1 reportid 3: 56 variable keys, 0 key codes wskbd2 at ukbd1 mux 1 wskbd2: connecting to wsdisplay0 Another Logitech USB keyboard works well. Its dmesg is: uhidev0 at uhub3 port 2 configuration 1 interface 0 Logitech Logitech USB Keyboard rev 1.10/28.00 addr 2 uhidev0: iclass 3/1 ukbd0 at uhidev0: 8 variable keys, 6 key codes wskbd1 at ukbd0 mux 1 wskbd1: connecting to wsdisplay0 It seems that the OS detect two devices when I plugged in my Noppoo Mini Choc 84 USB keyboard. By the way, this Noppoo Mini Choc 84 USB keyboard works well on several diffirent linux distributions i ever used. Can any one help me? Can you post output of usbdevs -dv ? Can't see 0x1006 related with your device in /usr/src/sys/dev/usb , but any chance to try current? Thanks.
Re: LAN - LAN via External IP
James Chase james () wintercastle ! net If I fully understand your situation a lot of what you do depends on whether you intend to resolve names and whether you can use subnets. In my situation I have a number of servers and internal clients on different subnets with one external public IP address. pf obviously becomes trivial. The obvious issue is resolving zones you are authoritive for to internal clients. I've chosen to pass resolving onto the ISP partly to overcome this. If that's on the table as an option I recommend looking at this: http://www.openbsd.org/faq/pf/rdr.html#sepnet Once you do that, add a rule for your client subnet(s) that redirect any incoming on the corresponding internal_IF on your router to the appropriate server. That is: server =192.168.250.1 vhosts =58.108.203.117 pass in on pppoe0 inet proto tcp from any to (pppoe0) port www rdr-to $server pass out on xl0 inet proto tcp from any to $server port www pass in on dc0 inet proto tcp from dc0:network to $vhosts port www rdr-to $server pass in on rl0 inet proto tcp from rl0:network to $vhosts port www rdr-to $server Note vhosts can be any number of domains. Again it depends on different subnets and as far as resolving goes, public IPs can be returned and pf will take care of that. No other consideration necessary. As far as I understand it I was facing exactly the same decisions and made the sweeping decision to pass all resolving to the ISP. I have no over-riding security or performance consideration there and it seemed like a great idea to miss the fun of splitting DNS or screwing around with hosts files. Having a quick look at dhcpd.conf it might be possible to specify hosts from there. I expect it is but certainly doable by some other mechanism. I thought about chasing that down but in the end it didn't seem worth it. Best wishes.
no BIOS memory map supplied
With today's i386 snapshot (Nov 14th) and the previous (Nov 11th), the booting bsd goes straight to ddb prompt saying panic: no BIOS memory map supplied This is on a Thinkpad T40. Is anyone else seeing this?
Re: no BIOS memory map supplied
On Nov 14 08:35:37, h...@stare.cz wrote: With today's i386 snapshot (Nov 14th) and the previous (Nov 11th), the booting bsd goes straight to ddb prompt saying panic: no BIOS memory map supplied This is on a Thinkpad T40. Is anyone else seeing this? Forgot to add: here is an older snapshot that worked fine: OpenBSD 5.2-current (GENERIC) #0: Fri Oct 19 10:07:44 CEST 2012 r...@ibm.stare.cz:/usr/src/sys/arch/i386/compile/GENERIC cpu0: Intel(R) Pentium(R) M processor 1500MHz (GenuineIntel 686-class) 1.50 GHz cpu0: FPU,V86,DE,PSE,TSC,MSR,MCE,CX8,SEP,MTRR,PGE,MCA,CMOV,CFLUSH,DS,ACPI,MMX,FXSR,SSE,SSE2,TM,PBE,EST,TM2 real mem = 267317248 (254MB) avail mem = 251990016 (240MB) mainbus0 at root bios0 at mainbus0: AT/286+ BIOS, date 06/18/07, BIOS32 rev. 0 @ 0xfd750, SMBIOS rev. 2.33 @ 0xe0010 (61 entries) bios0: vendor IBM version 1RETDRWW (3.23 ) date 06/18/2007 bios0: IBM 237382G apm0 at bios0: Power Management spec V1.2 acpi at bios0 function 0x0 not configured pcibios0 at bios0: rev 2.1 @ 0xfd6e0/0x920 pcibios0: PCI IRQ Routing Table rev 1.0 @ 0xfdea0/272 (15 entries) pcibios0: PCI Interrupt Router at 000:31:0 (Intel 82371FB ISA rev 0x00) pcibios0: PCI bus #6 is the last bus bios0: ROM list: 0xc/0x1 0xd/0x1000 0xd1000/0x1000 0xdc000/0x4000! 0xe/0x1 cpu0 at mainbus0: (uniprocessor) cpu0: Enhanced SpeedStep 1496 MHz: speeds: 1500, 1400, 1200, 1000, 800, 600 MHz pci0 at mainbus0 bus 0: configuration mode 1 (bios) 0:31:1: io address conflict 0x5800/0x8 0:31:1: io address conflict 0x5808/0x4 0:31:1: io address conflict 0x5810/0x8 0:31:1: io address conflict 0x580c/0x4 pchb0 at pci0 dev 0 function 0 Intel 82855PM Host rev 0x03 intelagp0 at pchb0 agp0 at intelagp0: aperture at 0xd000, size 0x1000 ppb0 at pci0 dev 1 function 0 Intel 82855PM AGP rev 0x03 pci1 at ppb0 bus 1 vga1 at pci1 dev 0 function 0 ATI Radeon Mobility M7 rev 0x00 wsdisplay0 at vga1 mux 1: console (80x25, vt100 emulation) wsdisplay0: screen 1-5 added (80x25, vt100 emulation) radeondrm0 at vga1: irq 11 drm0 at radeondrm0 uhci0 at pci0 dev 29 function 0 Intel 82801DB USB rev 0x01: irq 11 uhci1 at pci0 dev 29 function 1 Intel 82801DB USB rev 0x01: irq 11 uhci2 at pci0 dev 29 function 2 Intel 82801DB USB rev 0x01: irq 11 ehci0 at pci0 dev 29 function 7 Intel 82801DB USB rev 0x01: irq 11 usb0 at ehci0: USB revision 2.0 uhub0 at usb0 Intel EHCI root hub rev 2.00/1.00 addr 1 ppb1 at pci0 dev 30 function 0 Intel 82801BAM Hub-to-PCI rev 0x81 pci2 at ppb1 bus 2 2:0:0: mem address conflict 0xb000/0x1000 2:0:1: mem address conflict 0xb100/0x1000 cbb0 at pci2 dev 0 function 0 TI PCI1520 CardBus rev 0x01: irq 11 cbb1 at pci2 dev 0 function 1 TI PCI1520 CardBus rev 0x01: irq 11 em0 at pci2 dev 1 function 0 Intel PRO/1000MT (82540EP) rev 0x03: irq 11, address 00:0d:60:7f:83:fa ipw0 at pci2 dev 2 function 0 Intel PRO/Wireless 2100 rev 0x04: irq 11, address 00:0c:f1:16:9b:b8 cardslot0 at cbb0 slot 0 flags 0 cardbus0 at cardslot0: bus 3 device 0 cacheline 0x8, lattimer 0xb0 pcmcia0 at cardslot0 cardslot1 at cbb1 slot 1 flags 0 cardbus1 at cardslot1: bus 6 device 0 cacheline 0x8, lattimer 0xb0 pcmcia1 at cardslot1 ichpcib0 at pci0 dev 31 function 0 Intel 82801DBM LPC rev 0x01: 24-bit timer at 3579545Hz pciide0 at pci0 dev 31 function 1 Intel 82801DBM IDE rev 0x01: DMA, channel 0 configured to compatibility, channel 1 configured to compatibility wd0 at pciide0 channel 0 drive 0: HTS548040M9AT00 wd0: 16-sector PIO, LBA, 35087MB, 71859186 sectors wd0(pciide0:0:0): using PIO mode 4, Ultra-DMA mode 5 atapiscsi0 at pciide0 channel 1 drive 0 scsibus0 at atapiscsi0: 2 targets cd0 at scsibus0 targ 0 lun 0: HL-DT-ST, DVD-ROM GDR8083N, 0K03 ATAPI 5/cdrom removable cd0(pciide0:1:0): using PIO mode 4, Ultra-DMA mode 2 ichiic0 at pci0 dev 31 function 3 Intel 82801DB SMBus rev 0x01: irq 11 iic0 at ichiic0 spdmem0 at iic0 addr 0x50: 256MB DDR SDRAM non-parity PC2700CL2.5 auich0 at pci0 dev 31 function 5 Intel 82801DB AC97 rev 0x01: irq 11, ICH4 AC97 ac97: codec id 0x41445374 (Analog Devices AD1981B) ac97: codec features headphone, 20 bit DAC, No 3D Stereo audio0 at auich0 Intel 82801DB Modem rev 0x01 at pci0 dev 31 function 6 not configured usb1 at uhci0: USB revision 1.0 uhub1 at usb1 Intel UHCI root hub rev 1.00/1.00 addr 1 usb2 at uhci1: USB revision 1.0 uhub2 at usb2 Intel UHCI root hub rev 1.00/1.00 addr 1 usb3 at uhci2: USB revision 1.0 uhub3 at usb3 Intel UHCI root hub rev 1.00/1.00 addr 1 isa0 at ichpcib0 isadma0 at isa0 com0 at isa0 port 0x3f8/8 irq 4: ns16550a, 16 byte fifo com1 at isa0 port 0x2f8/8 irq 3: ns16550a, 16 byte fifo pckbc0 at isa0 port 0x60/5 pckbd0 at pckbc0 (kbd slot) pckbc0: using irq 1 for kbd slot wskbd0 at pckbd0: console keyboard, using wsdisplay0 pms0 at pckbc0 (aux slot) pckbc0: using irq 12 for aux slot wsmouse0 at pms0 mux 0 wsmouse1 at pms0 mux 0 pms0: Synaptics touchpad, firmware 5.9 pcppi0 at isa0 port 0x61 spkr0 at pcppi0 lpt2 at isa0 port 0x3bc/4: polled npx0 at isa0 port 0xf0/16:
HP Ethernet 1Gb 4-port 331FLR card supported?
Hi, we have a HP Proliant Server Gen8, where we want to run OpenBSD on it. The card mentioned has to go into the FlexibleLOM port on the server, therefore there is not that much choice of a card. As far as I have seen, this card is not listed in any of the drivers, but I found that link here: http://partnerweb.vmware.com/comp_guide1/detail.php?device_cat=iodevice_id=21446 which tells me that the card has a BroadCom NetXtreme BCM5719 chipset, and bge(4) at least tells me, that this chipset is supported. But to be sure, I thought trying to ask if anyone has such a card in use with OpenBSD? thanks, Sebastian
