as far as i remember, you have to first shutdown the host for that WOL
will work. (im not sure but something like 'shutdown -p')
(hit the start button to shutoff computer :-)
danny
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Dear Thomas,
>
> Well - I'm still trying to get pptp to cooperate and set up
> a VPN connection to a Microsoft VPN server.
>
> I'm just wondering - is there _anyone_ out there that has
> met with success using pptp - and, if so, could you share
> your /etc/ppp/ppp.conf settings?
>
http://kjkost
>
> Dear Thomas,
>
> >
> > Well - I'm still trying to get pptp to cooperate and set up
> > a VPN connection to a Microsoft VPN server.
> >
> > I'm just wondering - is there _anyone_ out there that has
> > met with success using pptp - and, if so, could you share
> > your /etc/ppp/ppp.conf sett
Dominic Marks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, May 01, 2002 at 03:47:13PM -0400, Thomas David Rivers wrote:
> >
> > Well - I'm still trying to get pptp to cooperate and set up
> > a VPN connection to a Microsoft VPN server.
> >
> > I'm just wondering - is there _anyone_ out there that has
>
Julian Elischer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I've always had better success using the mpd port for pptp..
>
It's installed now :-) I'm going to try and "give it a go" this
morning!
I'll let everyone know how it goes...
- Thanks! -
- Dave Rivers -
To Unsubscribe: send
On 01-May-2002 Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> * Nelson, Trent . <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020501 06:41] wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'm working on porting the Linux Cisco VPN client kernel module to
>> FreeBSD. The API interface between the OS and their actual driver has four
>> spinlock functions that oper
/sbin/restore currently does not set the uid, gid, mode or times of
symbolic links. In particular, the owner of the link is left as the owner
of the restore process.
Would someone consider checking in the patch I supplied in:
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=bin/37665
The patch is
> ctrl-alt-B gives me a utility to select things in the netbooting area.
> But no selection of WOL.
>
> Is this what you saw on your card?
>
I'll have to check when I get home from work...
Ken
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the m
Hi there,
I have an unusual question, and hope I'll find the answer on this list. I
would like to build a redundant structure of firewalls (2 of them), and I
really don't have any idea on how to do that. What I would like is a
scheme like:
_
Julian Elischer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I've always had better success using the mpd port for pptp..
OK - I went through the mpd documentation, etc.. very nice.
No problems setting things up, etc...
However, mpd isn't working for me either. It makes it through
the authentication,
Thomas David Rivers wrote:
> From the ppp.log file - it seems I have to have MSChapV2
> both enabled and disabled at the same time. At some points
> in the negotiation it needs to be disabled (i.e. *not* used
> for authenticating the peer) - but at other points it needs
> to be enabled (to a
Hiya,
WRT redundant upstream links, I think it'll be much easier to use a BGP
solution. You could even setup load balancing at the same time with the help
of BGP. If both your uplinks are to the same ISP you can probably get away
with using Cisco's interface backup configuations so long as both u
Bogdan TARU wrote:
> I have an unusual question, and hope I'll find the answer on this list. I
> would like to build a redundant structure of firewalls (2 of them), and I
> really don't have any idea on how to do that. What I would like is a
> scheme like:
[ ... picture ... ]
> But the real qu
Terry Lambert wrote:
> Unfortunately, the FreeBSD ethernet interface isn't terribly
> smart. Ideally, it would provide a virtual interface per VIP,
> all the way down to the card; it doesn't.
Probably wasn't very clear here.
The Tigon II, for example, supports 4 VIPs, the Intel Gigabit
ethernet
>
> Thomas David Rivers wrote:
> > From the ppp.log file - it seems I have to have MSChapV2
> > both enabled and disabled at the same time. At some points
> > in the negotiation it needs to be disabled (i.e. *not* used
> > for authenticating the peer) - but at other points it needs
> > to b
Thomas David Rivers writes:
> If I add
> enable MSChapV2
> in /etc/ppp/ppp.conf - then our ppp client requires that the
> peer (the Microsoft VPN server) authenticate using MSChapV2. But,
> the Microsoft VPN peer refuses that (it's configured to not use
> MSChapV2.
Don't you want
>
> Thomas David Rivers writes:
> > If I add
> > enable MSChapV2
> > in /etc/ppp/ppp.conf - then our ppp client requires that the
> > peer (the Microsoft VPN server) authenticate using MSChapV2. But,
> > the Microsoft VPN peer refuses that (it's configured to not use
> > MSChapV2.
Thomas David Rivers writes:
> > > enable MSChapV2
> > > in /etc/ppp/ppp.conf - then our ppp client requires that the
> > > peer (the Microsoft VPN server) authenticate using MSChapV2. But,
> > > the Microsoft VPN peer refuses that (it's configured to not use
> > > MSChapV2.
> >
> > Don
Archie Cobbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Thomas David Rivers writes:
> > > > enable MSChapV2
> > > > in /etc/ppp/ppp.conf - then our ppp client requires that the
> > > > peer (the Microsoft VPN server) authenticate using MSChapV2. But,
> > > > the Microsoft VPN peer refuses tha
On Sat, 9 Mar 2002 04:52:25 -0600, Matthew D. Fuller wrote:
[in regard to multiple concurrent pw(8) processes hosing master.passwd]
> The reason for this is that the only file pw(8) locks is
> /etc/master.passwd.new when it copies into it.
[snip]
> If anybody's interested, I could take a stab
Thomas David Rivers wrote:
> > You will need to add a knob. One knob is not enough. You can
> > not have both tea and no tea at the sme time.
>
> Clearly - A AND NOT A is not something that can exist.
>
> But - does anyone have an idea what that could be? I was thinking,
> perhaps incorre
I'm interested too. I've seen this problem (quite a few times) on a large
system (1k-10k+) users. It only happens on systems being provisioned to via
pw.
Matt
On 5/2/02 4:27 PM, "Geoffrey C. Speicher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Sat, 9 Mar 2002 04:52:25 -0600, Matthew D. Fuller wrote:
>
Greetings! I have a FreeBSD-4.5 box that is a specialized server box. It
doesn't run any user processes and only runs a bunch of small, server
efficient processes.
I have an inconsistency that I am trying to explain. When I do a "w" command
on the box, I see this:
7:31PM up 74 days, 39 mins,
On 02-May-2002 Jason Borkowsky wrote:
>
> Greetings! I have a FreeBSD-4.5 box that is a specialized server box. It
> doesn't run any user processes and only runs a bunch of small, server
> efficient processes.
>
> I have an inconsistency that I am trying to explain. When I do a "w" command
> on
On Thu, May 02, 2002 at 05:10:00PM -0400 I heard the voice of
Matt Simerson, and lo! it spake thus:
>
> On 5/2/02 4:27 PM, "Geoffrey C. Speicher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 9 Mar 2002 04:52:25 -0600, Matthew D. Fuller wrote:
> >
> > [in regard to multiple concurrent pw(8) proces
On Thu, 2 May 2002, Matthew D. Fuller wrote:
>
> What do people think of using the external lock file (well, I can't
> actually think of any OTHER way to do it, so...)? I'm thinking /var/run,
> but on the flipside just putting it in /etc might be cleaner. Comments?
>
Feel free to correct me if
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Jason
Borkowsky writes:
>1. How is it my load average is over 1, but my single CPU is 85% idle?
This is quite possible due to process synchronisation, since there
is no direct relationship between the load average and the percentage
of time that the CPU is idle. T
> > Greetings! I have a FreeBSD-4.5 box that is a specialized server box. It
> > doesn't run any user processes and only runs a bunch of small, server
> > efficient processes.
> >
> > I have an inconsistency that I am trying to explain. When I do a "w" command
> > on the box, I see this:
> >
> >
On Fri, Apr 26, 2002 at 04:58:32PM +0100, Mark Murray wrote:
> > If anyone is interested I'd appreciate some testing, and it
> > would be nice to get it committed eventually.
>
> Ooooh! :-)
> Yes please!
> I'll look at this.
Please restore the CSRG ID's and Copyright along with other changes we
Sorry, your stylized text, or HTML mail can not be distributed through
the ISP-Lists.
The only acceptable format for posting to the ISP-Lists is ASCII Text.
Please, re-send your post to continue your discussion on the ISP-Lists.
If you have any other questions concerning posting guidelines on t
[ note: freebsd-hackers being removed from the cc: list ]
Thomas David Rivers writes:
> mpd fails as well... with something very similar... it seems to
> send a CCP configuration request and simply gets no answer
> back from the Microsoft server. From the VPN log (you can see
> toward the bo
Archie Cobbs wrote:
> Thomas David Rivers writes:
> > If I add
> > enable MSChapV2
> > in /etc/ppp/ppp.conf - then our ppp client requires that the
> > peer (the Microsoft VPN server) authenticate using MSChapV2. But,
> > the Microsoft VPN peer refuses that (it's configured to not u
Terry Lambert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Archie Cobbs wrote:
> > Thomas David Rivers writes:
> > > If I add
> > > enable MSChapV2
> > > in /etc/ppp/ppp.conf - then our ppp client requires that the
> > > peer (the Microsoft VPN server) authenticate using MSChapV2. But,
> > > the
Thomas David Rivers wrote:
> > I guess we need to see a packet trace for a Windows machine
> > being successful, and a FreeBSD machine being unsuccessful,
> > in order to run a side-by-side comparison.
>
> Believe me! I've asked for such a thingy... apparently,
> the "magic software" needed t
What does the _BP extension mean on the RELENG tags?
--
Dave Hayes - Consultant - Altadena CA, USA - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> The opinions expressed above are entirely my own <<<
It is difficult to make things foolproof because fools are
so ingenious.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL P
Dave Hayes wrote:
> What does the _BP extension mean on the RELENG tags?
Branch Point.
It means the code has been branched, either for a code slush,
or for other work that may not make it back in until it's
complete, which might take a while.
-- Terry
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTEC
If memory serves me right, Dave Hayes wrote:
> What does the _BP extension mean on the RELENG tags?
It marks the "branch point" where the RELENG_* branch was created from
the HEAD.
Bruce.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the mess
If memory serves me right, Terry Lambert wrote:
> Dave Hayes wrote:
> > What does the _BP extension mean on the RELENG tags?
>
> Branch Point.
>
> It means the code has been branched,
Yes.
> either for a code slush,
> or for other work that may not make it back in until it's
> complete, which
Dave Hayes writes:
> What does the _BP extension mean on the RELENG tags?
"Branch point".
-Archie
__
Archie Cobbs * Packet Design * http://www.packetdesign.com
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Bruce A. Mah" wrote:
> > either for a code slush,
> > or for other work that may not make it back in until it's
> > complete, which might take a while.
>
> Nope. The original poster asked about RELENG_* branches; they aren't
> used that way, which I'm sure you know.
???
http://www.freebsd.org
- Original Message -
From: "Terry Lambert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Dave Hayes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2002 3:02 PM
Subject: Re: Difference between RELENG_* and RELENG_*_BP
[snip]
> I guess it's not o
If memory serves me right, Terry Lambert wrote:
> "Bruce A. Mah" wrote:
> > > either for a code slush,
> > > or for other work that may not make it back in until it's
> > > complete, which might take a while.
> >
> > Nope. The original poster asked about RELENG_* branches; they aren't
> > used t
On Thu, May 02, 2002 at 03:15:53PM -0700, Drew Tomlinson wrote:
> I'm just trying to understand. :) How is RELENG_X_Y_BP different from
> RELENG_X_Y_RELEASE?
RELENG_X_Y_BP is the point on RELENG_X where the RELENG_X_Y branch was
created. RELENG_X_Y_0_RELEASE is the point on the RELENG_X_Y branc
Drew Tomlinson wrote:
> I'm just trying to understand. :) How is RELENG_X_Y_BP different from
> RELENG_X_Y_RELEASE?
For the most part, studying the FreeBSD source tree is a good lesson
in how to be clever in your use of CVS. The only place it really
falls down is in the lack of vendor tagging f
Brooks Davis wrote:
> On Thu, May 02, 2002 at 03:15:53PM -0700, Drew Tomlinson wrote:
> > I'm just trying to understand. :) How is RELENG_X_Y_BP different from
> > RELENG_X_Y_RELEASE?
>
> RELENG_X_Y_BP is the point on RELENG_X where the RELENG_X_Y branch was
> created. RELENG_X_Y_0_RELEASE is t
- Original Message -
From: "Terry Lambert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2002 3:37 PM
> Drew Tomlinson wrote:
> > I'm just trying to understand. :) How is RELENG_X_Y_BP different
from
> > RELENG_X_Y_RELEASE?
>
> For the most part, studying the FreeBSD source tree is a good
Drew Tomlinson wrote:
> Yes it does. Thank you for your through and detailed explaination.
I'm positive that someone else could have done a better
job, and then updated the documentation (hint hint 8-)).
-- Terry
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers"
Thanks all for the responses. Between the web pages and this
discussion, my knowledge of this has now become a *lot* clearer.
Terry Lambert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> -STABLE is called -STABLE these days, but RELENG_X -STABLE is
> really RELENG_X_Y + changes pending RELENG_X_(Y+1). Way back
>
On Thu, May 02, 2002 at 08:44:02PM -0700, Dave Hayes wrote:
> Terry Lambert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > -STABLE is called -STABLE these days, but RELENG_X -STABLE is
> > really RELENG_X_Y + changes pending RELENG_X_(Y+1). Way back
> > when, I think we had a long knock-down drag-out fight abou
Brooks Davis wrote:
>>I'm sure you folks hashed this all over before, but really...calling a
>>branch "-stable" when it really isn't is not good semantic practice
>>IMNSHO.
>
>
> DO NOT EVEN CONSIDER STARTING THIS THREAD!!! It's been hashed over more
> times then are worth counting on various
On Thu, May 02, 2002 at 10:03:24PM -0700, Michael Sierchio wrote:
> Brooks Davis wrote:
>
> >>I'm sure you folks hashed this all over before, but really...calling a
> >>branch "-stable" when it really isn't is not good semantic practice
> >>IMNSHO.
> >
> >
> > DO NOT EVEN CONSIDER STARTING THIS
Brooks Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> DO NOT EVEN CONSIDER STARTING THIS THREAD!!! It's been hashed
Double gah. Forget I said anything. ;)
> However, just ranting about this problem[0] won't accomplish anything
> other then wasting a lot of time and energy, IMO. There's plenty of
> histor
52 matches
Mail list logo