On Thu, Jan 24, 2008 at 01:07:22PM -0500, Yousif Hassan wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-01-24 at 10:36 -0600, Brooks Davis wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 24, 2008 at 10:58:33AM -0500, Yousif Hassan wrote:
> > > Thank you to all who responded.
> > >
> > > The suggestion was made to use devd or ifstated. Both s
On Thu, 24 Jan 2008, 17:20+0300, Maxim Konovalov wrote:
> > > The latter. Turning rfc1323 off solved the problem.
> > >
> > > It takes some time to obtain the dump -- I need to downgrade the
> > > system.
> >
> > That is not necessary. A tcpdump from current is fine.
> >
> OK, later this evening
Hi,
I am using poptop-1.3.4 on FreeBSD 6.1. Right now when a windows client
connects to VPN, it sets its end-point address as default gateway, that
means all traffic goes through us. Is there some way to make windows
create a specific route, instead of default route? Maybe it's
only possible to
Whatever, just run all future changes by silby.
On Jan 24, 2008 2:58 AM, Andre Oppermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Kip Macy wrote:
> > Did you talk to the original submitter? Note that FreeBSD's TCP stack
> > is for use in servers and is not intending as a validating TCP stack.
> > If you would
On 1/24/08, Alexandre Vieira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> FYI
>
> http://www.freshports.org/net/relayd/
>
> kudos to kuriyama@
>
> --
> Alexandre Vieira - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Yay! Thanks to everyone involved in bringing this over. I was about
to start porting this and you just saved me a lot of ti
On Jan 15, 2008 9:58 PM, Alexandre Vieira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Jan 15, 2008 8:29 PM, Brad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Tuesday 15 January 2008 15:24:52 Bruce M. Simpson wrote:
> > > Alexandre Vieira wrote:
> > > > Hello all,
> > > >
> > > > I remember that there was a port (n
Hi,
I have extended ip_carp.c to provide loadbalancing on an ip basis, eg. to
setup an active/active cluster. The algorithm is quite simple. Each cluster
consists of N nodes. If an IPv4/IPv6 packet reaches node X, then it
evaluates X == N mod source_address_of_IP_packet. If this is true, then the
On Thu, 2008-01-24 at 10:36 -0600, Brooks Davis wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 24, 2008 at 10:58:33AM -0500, Yousif Hassan wrote:
> > Thank you to all who responded.
> >
> > The suggestion was made to use devd or ifstated. Both sound like
> > excellent tools, but I'm currently being tripped up by a core pr
On Thu, Jan 24, 2008 at 10:58:33AM -0500, Yousif Hassan wrote:
> Thank you to all who responded.
>
> The suggestion was made to use devd or ifstated. Both sound like
> excellent tools, but I'm currently being tripped up by a core problem -
> both tools rely on the kernel to notify userland of lin
Thank you to all who responded.
The suggestion was made to use devd or ifstated. Both sound like
excellent tools, but I'm currently being tripped up by a core problem -
both tools rely on the kernel to notify userland of link state changes
(which makes complete sense!). This is all well and good
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivery-Date: Thu Jan 24 05:00:27 2008
Received: from staring.karels.net ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [206.196.45.1])
by redrock.karels.net (8.13.8/8.13.6) with ESMTP id m0OB0Rb6097199
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Thu, 24 Jan 2008 05:00:27 -0600 (CST)
(enve
> > The latter. Turning rfc1323 off solved the problem.
> >
> > It takes some time to obtain the dump -- I need to downgrade the
> > system.
>
> That is not necessary. A tcpdump from current is fine.
>
OK, later this evening (UTC+3).
--
Maxim Konovalov
__
Maxim Konovalov wrote:
On Thu, 24 Jan 2008, 13:52+0100, Andre Oppermann wrote:
Maxim Konovalov wrote:
[...]
I'm not generally opposed to security improvements that only affect edge
cases... but being unable to connect is not an edge case!
Fully agreed. I'll reopen the PR and follow up with
On Thu, 24 Jan 2008, 13:52+0100, Andre Oppermann wrote:
> Maxim Konovalov wrote:
> > [...]
> > > > I'm not generally opposed to security improvements that only affect edge
> > > > cases... but being unable to connect is not an edge case!
> > > Fully agreed. I'll reopen the PR and follow up with t
Maxim Konovalov wrote:
[...]
I'm not generally opposed to security improvements that only affect edge
cases... but being unable to connect is not an edge case!
Fully agreed. I'll reopen the PR and follow up with the originator
to do some further analysis. All operating system he cites that we
Hi Rob,
Since upgrading to 7.0 I am no longer able to SSH into my server. I
cvsup'ed to 7.0 code and rebuild world and since then I have had this
issue. I have rebuilt multiple times in beta 1, 1.5 and 2. I can SSH into
my host from some hosts within the local LAN. Some machines from outside my
[...]
> > I'm not generally opposed to security improvements that only affect edge
> > cases... but being unable to connect is not an edge case!
>
> Fully agreed. I'll reopen the PR and follow up with the originator
> to do some further analysis. All operating system he cites that were
> unable t
Kip Macy wrote:
Did you talk to the original submitter? Note that FreeBSD's TCP stack
is for use in servers and is not intending as a validating TCP stack.
If you would like it to serve as such you would better served by
tracking down the ANVL tests that FreeBSD fails. Also note that there
is no
Mike Silbersack wrote:
On Wed, 23 Jan 2008, Andre Oppermann wrote:
OTOH the enforcement of this rule wasn't really there before and it
may be argued that we've got a POLA violation here. A careful reading
That's exactly the point. We were not enforcing timestamps since...
whenever the RFC
19 matches
Mail list logo
