On 9 May 2016 at 08:16, Damien Fleuriot wrote:
> @Eitan
> The problem with adjusting this at syslog (or rsyslog)'s level is that you
> effectively generate the message, then have to expand even more work to
> actually suppress it, making your machine work twice for no reason.
To be clear: I wasn
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.
Closed by commit rS299315: tcp/syncache: Add comment for syncache_respond
(authored by sephe).
CHANGED PRIOR TO COMMIT
https://reviews.freebsd.org/D6148?vs=15728&id=16100#toc
REPOSITORY
rS FreeBSD src repository
CHANG
+ Nigel
On 05/06/16 at 03:00P, Sonny Son wrote:
> Dear,
>
> I would like to try multipath TCP. Can somebody tell me what is the most
> recommended one? v0.51 seems to be the latest one. Is it the one that I
> should try?
>
> Thank you!
>
>
> ___
> fr
On 9 May 2016 at 15:56, Eitan Adler wrote:
> On 9 May 2016 at 02:02, Nick Hibma wrote:
> > Folks,
> >
> > In PR 166255 [1] it is suggested to allow disabling ‘promiscuous mode
> enabled’ warnings. It adds a sysctl to allow toggling this behaviour. I
> have a number of questions before I commit
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=166255
bor...@sarenet.es changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bor...@sarenet.es
--- Comment #
On 9 May 2016 at 02:02, Nick Hibma wrote:
> Folks,
>
> In PR 166255 [1] it is suggested to allow disabling ‘promiscuous mode
> enabled’ warnings. It adds a sysctl to allow toggling this behaviour. I have
> a number of questions before I commit the patch:
I don't any concern with a sysctl, but
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=166255
--- Comment #7 from eu...@grosbein.net ---
(In reply to borjam from comment #6)
Better than nothing.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
freebsd-net@fre
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=166255
--- Comment #6 from bor...@sarenet.es ---
Some admins would certainly feel uncomfortable with this, as an unexpected
promisc mode can be a signal of something fishy going on.
As a lesser evil I would make the variable a loader only tunable.
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=166255
--- Comment #5 from Nick Hibma ---
That's not the point. The point is that an ACL might have to be applied when
the value is being changed, depending on security level that the kernel is in,
and I am not knowledgable about that.
I've sent
Folks,
In PR 166255 [1] it is suggested to allow disabling ‘promiscuous mode enabled’
warnings. It adds a sysctl to allow toggling this behaviour. I have a number of
questions before I commit the patch:
- are there any security related considerations wrt disabling this
warning?
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=166255
--- Comment #4 from eu...@grosbein.net ---
(In reply to Nick Hibma from comment #3)
How an ACL would be better than single root-modified sysctl from the security
point of view?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=166255
Nick Hibma changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||n...@van-laarhoven.org
--- Comment #3
12 matches
Mail list logo
