Re: Problem with httpd and openssl on NetBSD-7.1

[Christopher Pinon]

Gary Duzan  wrote:

> In Message <10926.1493743...@secondfloor.xyz>,
>Christopher Pinon wrote:
> 
> =>J. Lewis Muir  wrote:
> =>
> =>> On 05/02, Christopher Pinon wrote:
> =>> > By the way, another (easier) question about httpd: is there a way for
> =>> > httpd to listen to both plain http (port 80) requests and https (port
> =>> > 443) requests? (Like apache.) At the moment, as far as I can tell, it's
> =>> > either or, depending on whether or not '-Z ...' is set.
> =>> 
> =>> I've not tried, but can't you just run two instances of it: one
> =>> listening on port 80 and the other listening on port 443?
> =>
> =>Thanks, Lewis: indeed, this works. :-) I guess that I was focused on
> =>doing this from /etc/rc.conf, but for no good reason, really. Am
> =>beginning to warm up to httpd after a long time with apache!
> 
>You still can use rc.conf, if you'd like. Copy /etc/rc.d/httpd
> to /etc/rc.d/httpsd (or something like that), and tweak the copy
> to have a different name, rcvar, and command_args. Then you can
> specify httpsd=YES in /etc/rc.conf, along with other variables you
> need for command_args.

Thanks, Gary, good point, that would surely work.

I guess that I was instinctively looking for a more minimalist solution,
and what seems to work is that I start one instance (in my case, the
SSL-instance) of httpd in /etc/rc.conf (as I was doing) and the other
(non-SSL) instance is handled by inetd (I had to modify /etc/inetd.conf
for this). This has the minor advantage (in addition to less
configuring!) that the non-SSL instance of httpd is only started when
needed. It seems to work. :-)

C.

Re: Problem with httpd and openssl on NetBSD-7.1

[Gary Duzan]

In Message <10926.1493743...@secondfloor.xyz>,
   Christopher Pinon wrote:

=>J. Lewis Muir  wrote:
=>
=>> On 05/02, Christopher Pinon wrote:
=>> > By the way, another (easier) question about httpd: is there a way for
=>> > httpd to listen to both plain http (port 80) requests and https (port
=>> > 443) requests? (Like apache.) At the moment, as far as I can tell, it's
=>> > either or, depending on whether or not '-Z ...' is set.
=>> 
=>> I've not tried, but can't you just run two instances of it: one
=>> listening on port 80 and the other listening on port 443?
=>
=>Thanks, Lewis: indeed, this works. :-) I guess that I was focused on
=>doing this from /etc/rc.conf, but for no good reason, really. Am
=>beginning to warm up to httpd after a long time with apache!

   You still can use rc.conf, if you'd like. Copy /etc/rc.d/httpd
to /etc/rc.d/httpsd (or something like that), and tweak the copy
to have a different name, rcvar, and command_args. Then you can
specify httpsd=YES in /etc/rc.conf, along with other variables you
need for command_args.

Gary Duzan

Re: Problem with httpd and openssl on NetBSD-7.1

[Christopher Pinon]

J. Lewis Muir  wrote:

> On 05/02, Christopher Pinon wrote:
> > By the way, another (easier) question about httpd: is there a way for
> > httpd to listen to both plain http (port 80) requests and https (port
> > 443) requests? (Like apache.) At the moment, as far as I can tell, it's
> > either or, depending on whether or not '-Z ...' is set.
> 
> I've not tried, but can't you just run two instances of it: one
> listening on port 80 and the other listening on port 443?

Thanks, Lewis: indeed, this works. :-) I guess that I was focused on
doing this from /etc/rc.conf, but for no good reason, really. Am
beginning to warm up to httpd after a long time with apache!

C.

Re: Problem with httpd and openssl on NetBSD-7.1

[J. Lewis Muir]

On 05/02, Christopher Pinon wrote:
> By the way, another (easier) question about httpd: is there a way for
> httpd to listen to both plain http (port 80) requests and https (port
> 443) requests? (Like apache.) At the moment, as far as I can tell, it's
> either or, depending on whether or not '-Z ...' is set.

I've not tried, but can't you just run two instances of it: one
listening on port 80 and the other listening on port 443?

Lewis

Re: mount_smbfs permission denied

[Stephen Borrill]

On Tue, 2 May 2017, Frank Wille wrote:

On Wed, 26 Apr 2017 16:56:10 +0200
Frank Wille  wrote:


The same doesn't work with mount_smbfs, or am I missing something?

tethys# mount_smbfs -I 192.168.0.251 -W WPSD 
//administrator@wps-terminal/Allgemeines /mnt
Password:
mount_smbfs: unable to open connection: syserr = Permission denied
mount_smbfs: lookup 13: Permission denied
[...]


Now I tested several dozen of servers in our network and mount_smbfs
works everywhere, except on two! Both are Active Domain Controllers
(one Server2003, the one I want to connect to, and the other Server2008).

I can create new shares there with access rights for everybody, but still
no chance to mount them!

Is there a known problem with such servers?


Domain controllers don't have the concept of local users, only domain 
users (i.e. you can't log on wps-terminal\administrator only 
DOMAIN\user). Sure that WPSD matches your domain?


--
Stephen

Re: NetBSD/usermode status

[r0ller]

Hi Kamil,

Thanks! I'll give it a try.

Best regards,
r0ller​​​
 Eredeti levél 
Feladó: Kamil Rytarowski < n54@gmx.com (Link -> 
mailto:n54@gmx.com) >
Dátum: 2017 április 30 11:01:59
Tárgy: Re: NetBSD/usermode status
Címzett: r0ller < netbsd-users@netbsd.org (Link -> 
mailto:netbsd-users@netbsd.org) >
 
I was told that usermode kernel requires custom hosting kernel with the
following module: sys/arch/usermode/modules/syscallemu
To build the usermode kernel we need to perform something similar to:
cd /usr/src/sys/arch/amd64/conf
config GENERIC_USERMODE
cd ../compile/GENERIC_USERMODE
make depend
make
To run it:
./netbsd
There is need to resurrect build of it.
Currently there might be no support to run the usermode version without
NetBSD kernel on host.
On 29.04.2017 14:08, r0ller wrote:
> Hi Greg,
>
> Yepp, that I know, that's why I asked it:) However, as the question is
> rather about the overhead of running code in one or the other way I
> asked jym at NetBSD who told that -besides the fact that only
> measurement can tell- based on his gut feeling, usermode should have
> less overhead if we don't take into account I/O.
>
> Best regards,
> r0ller
>
>  Eredeti levél 
> Feladó: Greg Troxel < gdt@lexort.com (Link -> 
mailto:gdt@lexort.com) >
> Dátum: 2017 április 29 11:51:10
> Tárgy: Re: NetBSD/usermode status
> Címzett: r0ller < r0ller@freemail.hu (Link -> 
mailto:r0ller@freemail.hu) >
>
> r0ller  writes:
>> By the way, does anyone know what would be faster: NetBSD domU on
>> NetBSD/Xen dom0 or NetBSD/usermode?
> That's a good question, but if you want a reliable setup to actually 
run
> something, I would recommend Xen. There are a lot of people running
> NetBSD/Xen, and I am not aware of a lot of NetBSD/userland use.
 

Re: mount_smbfs permission denied

[Frank Wille]

On Tue, 2 May 2017 13:47:24 +0100 (BST)
Stephen Borrill  wrote:

> > Now I tested several dozen of servers in our network and mount_smbfs
> > works everywhere, except on two! Both are Active Domain Controllers
> > (one Server2003, the one I want to connect to, and the other Server2008).
> >
> > I can create new shares there with access rights for everybody, but still
> > no chance to mount them!
> >
> > Is there a known problem with such servers?
> 
> Domain controllers don't have the concept of local users, only domain 
> users (i.e. you can't log on wps-terminal\administrator only 
> DOMAIN\user).

Ahh, good to know! Thanks. But would this knowledge change my command line
in any way?

It's still:
# mount_smbfs -I 192.168.0.251 -W WPSD //administrator@WPS-Terminal/Allgemeines 
/mnt
Isn't it?


> Sure that WPSD matches your domain?

Yes, quite sure. Or is it WPSD.lcl? But this doesn't work either.


-- 
Frank Wille

Re: mount_smbfs permission denied

[Frank Wille]

On Wed, 26 Apr 2017 16:56:10 +0200
Frank Wille  wrote:

> The same doesn't work with mount_smbfs, or am I missing something?
> 
> tethys# mount_smbfs -I 192.168.0.251 -W WPSD 
> //administrator@wps-terminal/Allgemeines /mnt
> Password:
> mount_smbfs: unable to open connection: syserr = Permission denied
> mount_smbfs: lookup 13: Permission denied
> [...]

Now I tested several dozen of servers in our network and mount_smbfs
works everywhere, except on two! Both are Active Domain Controllers
(one Server2003, the one I want to connect to, and the other Server2008).

I can create new shares there with access rights for everybody, but still
no chance to mount them!

Is there a known problem with such servers?

-- 
Frank Wille