Re: 4.8 breaks ral (hostap) for me
Out of curiosity, could you post your hostname.xxx configuration files? (minus the sensitive parts of course, like wpa-psk info etc.) On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 3:33 PM, Snoop wrote: > Hi Stephen (and anyone else), > I'm experiencing your same problem. I was looking for a solution on the > web but I'd say unsuccessfully. I couldn't found any reply to his > complaint (that is in fact the only one I've found around) and I was > wondering if you received a solution or a tip in private. > > Sorry for this late email, I usually don't like to disturb others and it > usually works (I found the solution on internet). But in this case I > didn't find anything at all! And this quite impressed me. I was thinking > that ral as AP was widely used too. > > Thanks in advance, any tip/direction is more than welcome. > > On Tue, 2010-11-30 at 03:33 +, Stephen Biggs wrote: >> Running 4.8 patch/stable with all updated, apm disable via config, upgraded from >> 4.7 patch/stable. >> >> Any time ral0 is initialized (in hostap mode) using, say, sh /etc/netstart, the >> following message is shown on the console: >> ral0: timeout waiting for BBP >> >> The code shows that when this happens, the device initialization is aborted and >> EIO error is returned, making 4.8 patch/stable useless for running the box as a >> wireless access point using ral. >> >> This may ordinarily point to hardware failing except for two things: >> 1. checking the code shows that the busy bit is actually cleared because no >> "cannot read from BBP" message is seen, only a 0 is returned from the version >> flash read. My guess is that some firmware is being loaded wrong onto the >> hardware in 4.8? >> ...and >> 2. ral0 initializes just fine without the timeout using either my previous 4.7 >> kernel, or the -current kernel which I am running now. >> >> The relevant parts of dmesg (relevant imho; if there is more that is needed, >> please advise) are: >> ral0 at pci0 dev 14 function 0 "Ralink RT2561S" rev 0x00: irq 3, address 00:24:1 >> d:39:f6:84 >> ral0: MAC/BBP RT2561C, RF RT2527 >> >> Also, pcidump -v shows for this device: >> B 0:14:0: Ralink RT2561S >> B B B B 0x: Vendor ID: 1814 Product ID: 0301 >> B B B B 0x0004: Command: 0017 Status ID: 0410 >> B B B B 0x0008: Class: 02 Subclass: 80 Interface: 00 Revision: 00 >> B B B B 0x000c: BIST: 00 Header Type: 00 Latency Timer: 20 Cache Line Size: 08 >> B B B B 0x0010: BAR mem 32bit addr: 0xe380 >> B B B B 0x0014: BAR empty () >> B B B B 0x0018: BAR empty () >> B B B B 0x001c: BAR empty () >> B B B B 0x0020: BAR empty () >> B B B B 0x0024: BAR empty () >> B B B B 0x0028: Cardbus CIS: 0601 >> B B B B 0x002c: Subsystem Vendor ID: 1458 Product ID: e934 >> B B B B 0x0030: Expansion ROM Base Address: >> B B B B 0x0038: >> B B B B 0x003c: Interrupt Pin: 01 Line: 03 Min Gnt: 00 Max Lat: 00 >> B B B B 0x0040: Capability 0x01: Power Management >> >> I don't know what to do next here. I am understandably very apprehensive about >> running a -current kernel on top of a 4.8 stable userland. B I don't want to be >> running -current at all. >> >> I was thinking about posting a bug using sendbug but that seems a bit pointless >> considering that I am right now running the -current kernel. >> >> The best case scenario would be for whomever knows what causes the -current >> kernel to work in this instance to post what relevant changes there are (or a >> patch?) or better yet, post a patch to the errata so I can go back to a 4.8 >> stable kernel with the patch. >> >> What is interesting about this is that I can't find any other mention of this >> problem anywhere else on the Internet. B I would have thought that a lot of >> people would be running ral0 as an access point and would have found this. >> >> If this is only local to me, I would sure appreciate any advice on how to track >> this down. >> > > > > > B -- > B Caselle da 1GB, trasmetti allegati fino a 3GB e in piu' IMAP, POP3 e SMTP autenticato? GRATIS solo con Email.it http://www.email.it/f > > B Sponsor: > B Idee Regalo Personalizzate a partire da euro 3.90! Su MisterCupido.com alta qualit` a prezzi imbattibili... e questa settimana GRATIS per te, la confezione regalo! > B Clicca qui: http://adv.email.it/cgi-bin/foclick.cgi?mid=11027&d=12-12
RAL(4) together with RT28XX chipset - recurring problem
I've been using the RAL(4) driver and a wifi card with the RT2561 chipset (Linksys WMP54g) for a few years as my wifi access point, and have had no problems at all. Recently I switched to an 802.11n card with RT2860 chipset (Edimax EW-7728in) in hopes of getting some higher transfer speeds to my server storage, only to find out that OpenBSD's 802.11 stack doesn't have any 11n functionality at all and thusly runs as 11g only. Since I switched to using the RT2860 chipset, first on obsd 4.3 and currently on 4.8, I've started to experience a recurring problem: every now and then, after disconnecting a machine from the access point, RAL(4) will refuse further connections from that machine (I'm not sure if it depends on the IP of the client or its MAC address etc.), resulting in only getting a "connection timed out" when trying to associate with the AP, until I down/up the RAL(4) interface or simply "restart" it using /etc/netstart. Any ideas? Anyone seen this with before with RAL(4) and/or the RT2860 family? I'm currently netstart'ing the interface every 24 hours via cron to solve the problem, but it feels like jumping through hoops, so to speak - this is after all a bug of some sort. Thankful for any info
802.11n and Host AP powersaving mode status
Just casually wondering if anyone know if there is any work at all being made on the 802.11 stack to enable 11n features (in particular the extra speed), and if any work is being made on the powersaving functionality in Host AP mode that is currently affecting all the wireless drivers (ral(4) etc.) Both these issues are quite pressing, leaving OpenBSD in the dust on the wireless front, both from it being severely impaired on transfers speeds due being locked down to 20mbps on 802.11g, and because of the troublesome packet loss issue when using OBSD as a wifi ap for clients that refuse to go out of powersaving mode (way more common than I thought) when noticing that the "other end" (read: OBSD machine) can't do powersaving. Any info on current progress on these two fronts is greatly appreciated. thanks in advance
Re: 24->16 bit audio
Where did you get this number from? A 16-bit source signal has, on a 0.3V analog output, a resolution finer than 0.05 volts per step, which is a voltage so tiny that it gets lost several times over in the SNR already at the DAC stage of a fine "HiFi soundcard" - before the signal has even had a chance to disappear in the natural noise of audio cabling and the amplifier stage. On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 3:11 PM, Alexandre Ratchov wrote: > > ... > > The trunctation of least significant bits is equivalent to > around -96dB noise. This is not far from what mixers, > preams, cables, etc generate. > > ... > > -- Alexandre
Re: Multiple ssl servers on one external IP by using internal addresses?
On Sat, Nov 8, 2008 at 4:56 PM, Jeff Ross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi all, > > I've got a problem with my web server and ssl that I'm having a hard > time figuring out. This might take a while to explain so bail now or > bear with me ;-) > Example of multiple vhosts sharing a single ip/certificate: http://sweon.net/2008/01/hosting-multiple-ssl-vhosts-on-a-single-ipportcertificate-with-apache2
Re: vsftpd/SSL
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 1:14 PM, stolendata. net <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 6:38 AM, Almir Karic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, Apr 13, 2008 at 7:37 PM, Manuel Heckel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > me again here. if it's the wrong place to ask, please tell me. > > > > i still have problems with vsftp and ssl, but i don't think it's a > > problem of vsftpd. from my intern lan everything works fine, just from > > outside the connections get dropped when the TLS starts. my config: pf > > with nat and ftp-proxy for the ftp connections from inside; vsftpd on > > the same machine, listening on port 21, forced ssl. as said, from my lan > > everthing works fine, from the outside only without SSL. > > vhy not use scp or sftp? they are sane protocols that don't require > things like ftp-proxy(8) to work. > > -- > error: one bad user found in front of screen > > Current SFTP solution of OpenSSH also lacks anything even remotely resembling the convenience VSFTPD offers for chrooted access to local users and userlists. The recent additions to OpenSSH enables administrators to jail their users, sure, but it does this in a way so clumsy that it trips over itself; solutions like hiding your users in nested dir's just to allow a shared httpd setup etc.. It's a good start, but it's very awkward. I clearly see the benefits of staying with the data-port / passive/active annoyances of FTP over TLS using VSFTPD. - SD
Re: gettimeofday() dramatical slowdown from 4.1->4.2
We came to this conclusion several posts ago :) It felt irrelevant to me what timecounter h/w / driver I was using - as stated repeated times, after reporting about this I was -just curious- on what changed from 4.1 to 4.2, and that has been perfectly elaborated already by Otto Moerbeek and yourself. What's interesting, though, is that the P3/600 and the Sempron/1.9 machines - again, both running 4.2-stable/i386 - both use the i8254 h/w + driver: kern.timecounter.tick=1 kern.timecounter.timestepwarnings=0 kern.timecounter.hardware=i8254 kern.timecounter.choice=i8254(0) dummy(-100) For your pleasure, dmesg for the Sempron-machine is here: http://pastebin.com/m4fce6b00 What you want to make of this is up to you. I am -perfectly- satisfied with the explanation that was given earlier in the thread. The C2D machines running in the park at work are out of my reach for many days ahead, as is the P3/600, so I can't please you with any dmesg's of those for now. -SD On Sat, Mar 15, 2008 at 11:10 AM, Stuart Henderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 2008-03-15, Jonathan Thornburg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Apart from these nits... my results on a Thinkpad T41p (i386 Pentium M) > > running 4.2-stable are (test program compiled with gcc 4.2.0, -g -O2): > > ... with 'apm -H' in effect (clock speed 1.7GHz): 2.92 seconds > > ... with 'apm -L' in effect (clock speed 0.6GHz): 3.98 seconds > > I think this proves that the hardware and/or driver for the > timecounters most people are testing this with are quicker to read > than whatever the original poster is using (but doesn't want to > tell us what it is - I don't understand why someone goes to the > trouble of providing a test program but won't include the > always-requested dmesg, but there you go). > > There are (if I counted correctly) 11 possibilities for timecounter > on i386 (though not all in the same machine :-) - note that the > kern.timecounter.hardware sysctl is /not/ read-only ...
Re: OpenBSD Strage Problem
"I think my dns file in openbsd has deleted. Where is the file for dns server. " For what it's worth, this file is /etc/resolv.conf Drop one DNS-server per line, and optionally add "lookup file bind" as first line if you wish to have your own entires in /etc/hosts to be read before asking the nameservers. -SD On Sat, Mar 15, 2008 at 12:14 AM, Peter_APIIT <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello all expert network administrator, i truly new to openbsd. > > I have some dhcp problem. > > http://forums.bsdnexus.com/viewtopic.php?id=1858 > -- > View this message in context: > http://www.nabble.com/OpenBSD-Strage-Problem-tp16062121p16062121.html > Sent from the openbsd user - misc mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: gettimeofday() dramatical slowdown from 4.1->4.2
my 4.1 and 4.2 machines are -stable, and all are running i386, clearly. My surprise and question was all in the fact that this changed from 4.1 to 4.2, and WHY it changed from 4.1 to 4.2. Otto Moerbeek has already explained that there was a change in the timecounter code, and your addition puts the rest in clear light and verifies that there is no change possible for getting the performance back. -SD On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 10:03 PM, Stuart Henderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Whichever timer hardware your system is using (you can see with > 'sysctl kern.timecounter') seems a bit on the slow side, my 1200MHz > X40 runs your test program in 2.9s. > > $ sysctl kern.timecounter > kern.timecounter.tick=1 > kern.timecounter.timestepwarnings=0 > kern.timecounter.hardware=ICHPM > kern.timecounter.choice=i8254(0) ICHPM(1000) dummy(-100) > > Have you compared bsd with bsd.mp? We don't even know what code you > run, or what hardware you have, there's no dmesg... > > As an aside, tc_init(9) is a good starting point if you want to > learn about the timecounter code.
Re: gettimeofday() dramatical slowdown from 4.1->4.2
The question is, how long would that take on the same hardware but on
4.1? :-) My guess is approx. 16 times less time.
I have now tested this on a third machine, a 1.9ghz Sempron LE-1100,
on both 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3 (all i386 dist), and the result is the same;
approx. 16 times slower gettimeofday() on 4.2 and 4.3.
Unix Fan's explanation is surely the reason, but it still leaves the
problem as a fact - a quite performance impairing fact.
Maybe someone will take a look at it and find a way to improve it. The
scenarios that are affected are numerous.
-SD
On 14 Mar 2008 12:53:06 -0700, Unix Fan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> $ ./time
>
>
>
> 100 calls to gettimeofday() ... 4.503s
>
>
>
> $ uname -srp
>
> OpenBSD 4.2 AMD Athlon(TM) XP 2600+ ("AuthenticAMD" 686-class, 512KB L2
> cache)
>
> $
>
>
>
> Seems fine here, looks like the error is on your end.. ;)
>
>
>
> Have you tested on 4.3/snapshots.. perhaps enabling/disabling acpi.. etc?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -Nix Fan.
Re: gettimeofday() dramatical slowdown from 4.1->4.2
4.3-snapshot of today: 8.0sec on same 1.83ghz C2D -SD On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 7:01 PM, Paul de Weerd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 06:08:42PM +0100, stolendata.net wrote: > | Upon trying to locate an unexplained, massive performance reduction > | when switching host for a number of applications from obsd 4.1 to 4.2, > | I found that it seems gettimeofday() has taken a nosedive in > | performance as of openbsd 4.2. > | > | A very blunt test confirmed it; however, I'm not sure wherein the > | process of gettimeofday() this happens. I can only imagine the > | performance issues this has lead to in environments that do frequent > | time-polling (heavily burdened webservers come to mind). > | > | http://pastebin.com/m311250a6 > > Have you tried 4.3 / -current yet ? > > My 3GHz amd64 machine running 4.3-ish : 1.675s > My 440MHz sparc64 machine running 4.2 : 3.512s > > So it doesn't seem to affect all platforms (although I have nothing to > compare it against for my sparc64). > > Cheers, > > Paul 'WEiRD' de Weerd > > -- > >[<++>-]<+++.>+++[<-->-]<.>+++[<+ > +++>-]<.>++[<>-]<+.--.[-] > http://www.weirdnet.nl/
gettimeofday() dramatical slowdown from 4.1->4.2
Upon trying to locate an unexplained, massive performance reduction when switching host for a number of applications from obsd 4.1 to 4.2, I found that it seems gettimeofday() has taken a nosedive in performance as of openbsd 4.2. A very blunt test confirmed it; however, I'm not sure wherein the process of gettimeofday() this happens. I can only imagine the performance issues this has lead to in environments that do frequent time-polling (heavily burdened webservers come to mind). http://pastebin.com/m311250a6
Re: What is WPA status in OpenBSD
IPSEC works well if you blissfully ignore the hassle of setting up IPSEC on every possible client you want to support in your network. OS X' native configuration panels does not deal with IPSEC, but, comes with Racoon so that one can take the trouble to set it up without having to compile additional software. Windows doesn't not deal with IPSEC easily either, and once one has taken the painstaking hassle to set it up they quickly find that the crypto supported isn't much to cheer over. I'm personally also waiting for the day WPA/2 capability finally shows up in OpenBSD, but, in the meanwhile, sure, unencrypted or WEP'd WiFi with IPSEC *works* - just not easily :) The best tip I can give to you, Dominik, is to go with OpenVPN for now. It's a much more convenient solution, especially since competent and intuitive client tools are freely available under both Windows, OS X, and BSD/Linux. -SD On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 4:28 AM, Luis Guillermo Coronado Chacon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Dominik, the short answer is: no, no WPA in OpenBSD. The long answer > lies on many, many, many posts on this list. (http://marc.info for more > details), but for a preview of all that: is not going to happen anytime > soon because no one actually provides code for it and so far not a > single developer wants/need it on the kernel. The reasons for this are > very well explained. > > Just asking for features is not the right way to approach this community > unless they come with some code attached :-d > > Believe me WEP+IPSEC (or WEP+ssh for that matter) works very well. > > Luis
Re: req. upgrade of openssl to allow sha256/512
Let's hope this change (finally) makes it into 4.4 then - it's WELL needed. And on that note, I'm just generally curious if anyone knows if there are some things that need to be taken in consideration should I build and update OpenSSL from the developers distribution? Specific path changes? -SD (ps. sorry for the "mismail", Stuart..)
req. upgrade of openssl to allow sha256/512
I noticed that the bundled version of OpenSSL has not had a major update for almost 2 years. Would it be possible to have the current 0.9.8 rev. included for the 4.3 release in order to get access to SHA256/512/etc. digestion? I've lately found that more and more software breaks on this point when trying to compile under OBSD due 0.9.7's lack of said crypto. -SD
