On 3/10/06, Diogin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello, every one:
I am sorry to ask thus stupid question. I have read the FAQ, but I
couldn't find any way to delete apache totally.
Now I want to use apache 2.0.55, but I'm worry about conflict.
Can some one help me? Thans very much!
You
On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 02:13:03PM +0800, Diogin wrote:
Hello, every one:
I am sorry to ask thus stupid question. I have read the FAQ, but I
couldn't find any way to delete apache totally.
Now I want to use apache 2.0.55, but I'm worry about conflict.
Can some one help me? Thans very
On 09/03/06, Florian Daniel Otel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello all,
I have the following question (== misunderstanding from my part?)
w.r.t. openbgp support for dynamic keying: I was living under the
impression (hope?) that the said support means not only that the keys
for the BGP peering
On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 04:54:08PM +1100, Rod.. Whitworth wrote:
Today I received a D-Link DWL-G122 . Unfortunately it is not a v. B1 -
it is C1.
If the box (i386) is booted on a 3.9beta #617 with the device plugged
in it gets a dmesg line that says:
Ralink 802.11 bg WLAN Class 0/0, rev
On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 09:36:07AM +, tony sarendal wrote:
On 09/03/06, Florian Daniel Otel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello all,
I have the following question (== misunderstanding from my part?)
w.r.t. openbgp support for dynamic keying: I was living under the
impression (hope?)
On Fri, 10 Mar 2006 20:42:44 +1100, Jonathan Gray wrote:
On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 04:54:08PM +1100, Rod.. Whitworth wrote:
Today I received a D-Link DWL-G122 . Unfortunately it is not a v. B1 -
it is C1.
If the box (i386) is booted on a 3.9beta #617 with the device plugged
in it gets a dmesg
On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 09:18:10PM +1100, Rod.. Whitworth wrote:
On Fri, 10 Mar 2006 20:42:44 +1100, Jonathan Gray wrote:
On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 04:54:08PM +1100, Rod.. Whitworth wrote:
Today I received a D-Link DWL-G122 . Unfortunately it is not a v. B1 -
it is C1.
If the box (i386)
On 3/10/06, Theo de Raadt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But financially we are under strain, and it is not letting us grow any
of our bigger plans.
It sounds like you really have big plans. Maybe it is a good idea to
tell about them, maybe that will make the big companies interested in
2006/3/10, Nick Holland [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I'm not entirely sure I understand your question, the subject and the
body of your message don't seem to be completely related.
However, I think you may find the answers to your questions in
man 8 crash
Third paragraph (more or less, depending
Stefan Drexleri wrote:
2006/3/10, Nick Holland [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I'm not entirely sure I understand your question, the subject and the
body of your message don't seem to be completely related.
However, I think you may find the answers to your questions in
man 8 crash
Third paragraph (more
Without ever having looked at this I would guess that openbgpd support
for dynamic keying is for securing the bgp session itself, nothing more.
Yes, this is correct.
*sigh*. There goes hopes for elegant BGP-IPsec VPNs, back to BGP over
GRE over IPsec.
Thanks Claudio, Tony for clearing
hi,
you have a main misunderstanding here because you're mixing up the
identities with the flows.
On Thu, Mar 09, 2006 at 09:29:29PM +0100, Marc Peters wrote:
i am using -current as of 24.02.2006 and made a realese for my other
machines. i tried the ipsec tutorial which was posted on
Back on the issue of the t-shirt suggestion.
How about on the back of OpenBSD t-shirts, the slogan:
Parasites don't puff, or even blow, they suck!
Catchy, is it not?
I'll get my coat.
--
Best regards,
Craig
http://slashboot.org/
On 10/03/06, Wijnand Wiersma [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 3/10/06, Theo de Raadt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But financially we are under strain, and it is not letting us grow any
of our bigger plans.
It sounds like you really have big plans. Maybe it is a good idea to
tell about
Hi
I need to setup an IPSEC VPN between 2 locations. 1 location runs
Cisco gear (out of my control) and the other runs OpenBSD (my decision).
I've never setup a VPN between Cisco and OpenBSD before (I did between
Cisco to Cisco and OpenBSD to OpenBSD) and I was wondering if there are
any
Talk is really cheap. Getting a business, either the one you work for or
a vendor, to donate hardware or funding is much harder. So instead of
TALKING about it what you MIGHT do, go out and find equipment/funding from
somewhere. Once you get something concrete notify Theo of what you have.
This
On Fri, 10 Mar 2006, Paolo Supino wrote:
Hi
I need to setup an IPSEC VPN between 2 locations. 1 location runs
Cisco gear (out of my control) and the other runs OpenBSD (my decision).
I've never setup a VPN between Cisco and OpenBSD before (I did between
Cisco to Cisco and OpenBSD to
thx for your answer.
Reyk Floeter schrieb:
hi,
you have a main misunderstanding here because you're mixing up the
identities with the flows.
On Thu, Mar 09, 2006 at 09:29:29PM +0100, Marc Peters wrote:
i am using -current as of 24.02.2006 and made a realese for my other
machines. i tried
btw.,
On Thu, Mar 09, 2006 at 09:29:29PM +0100, Marc Peters wrote:
i am using -current as of 24.02.2006 and made a realese for my other
machines. i tried the ipsec tutorial which was posted on undeadly.org. i
have to go with one gateway which has a dynamic ip because it is an
adsl-connection
On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 03:53:15PM +0100, Reyk Floeter wrote:
3.) The laptops are using /30 subnets in the 172.16.0.0/16 range and
they're reachable via the VPN. Have a look at ssh_config(5) or the
src/usr.bin/ssh/README.tun file for details. SSH-VPN can be used
almost everywhere (even with
A thought suddenly occurs. Perhaps big companies that use OpenBSD do not
want to disclose their use by donating because they fear that this might
give their competitors an advantage(now their competitors know what OS
they're using), or might help crackers/s-kiddies/etc. attack that
company now
On 10/03/06, A Rossi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A thought suddenly occurs. Perhaps big companies that use OpenBSD do not
want to disclose their use by donating because they fear that this might
give their competitors an advantage(now their competitors know what OS
they're using), or might help
OpenBSd always charges nothing back, that's an ideology (that's the
way i see). The price of ideologies in a world like ours is expensive.
For instance, i am tired of seeing big players using openssh and the
like. They give nothing back to OpenBSD. Probable the thrid BSD
license clause should be
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
OpenBSd always charges nothing back, that's an ideology (that's the
way i see). The price of ideologies in a world like ours is expensive.
For instance, i am tired of seeing big players using openssh and the
like. They give nothing back to OpenBSD. Probable the thrid
On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 08:12:59AM -0500, Paolo Supino wrote:
Hi
I need to setup an IPSEC VPN between 2 locations. 1 location runs
Cisco gear (out of my control) and the other runs OpenBSD (my decision).
depending on whether this is relevant to your needs or not, vpnc
from
On 3/10/06, jared r r spiegel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
i am using vpnc just to access work-vpn, tho, and not for something
such as setting up a permanant tunnel between two gateways.
AFAIK vpnc does not support rekeying yet, and that sucks :-)
numlockx doesn't seem to have any effect on either of my computers.
I've tried both numlockx-1.0 from ports and
http://ktown.kde.org/~seli/numlockx/numlockx-1.1.tar.gz so I'm
suspecting OpenBSD X11. My Xorg logs and confs are at http://enop.org/obsd/
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of
Spruell, Darren-Perot
Sent: March 10, 2006 12:34 PM
To: misc@openbsd.org
Subject: Re: Pre-orders for our releases.
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
OpenBSd always charges nothing back, that's an ideology
[IMAGE]
Customer Service message
[IMAGE]
We are glad to inform you that our bank has a new security system. The
updated technology will insure the security of your payments trough our
bank. Hoping you'll understand that we are doing this for your own
safety, we suggest you to renew your account
Hi Craig,
Of course, for this to benefit
OpenBSD
they'd have to be registered as a charitable organization etc. etc. and
that
is probably somewhere they either don't want to or can't go (or they
already
have and I just don't know)
Ain't. Gonna. Happen. (See the archives; really)
I think
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of
Nico Meijer
Sent: March 10, 2006 2:56 PM
To: misc@openbsd.org
Subject: Re: FW: Pre-orders for our releases.
Hi Craig,
Of course, for this to benefit
OpenBSD
they'd have to be registered as a
On 3/6/06, Bryan Irvine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We seem to be having a problem with random disconnects after
instituting carp on our gateway. The problem is only happening with
our telnet[1] users connected to our legacy systems.
The problem only happens with remote users that come in via
Man, talk, talk, talk, blah, blah, blah.
quit blathering and just do it!
On 3/10/06, Wijnand Wiersma [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Maybe I think too good about people/companies, but maybe if you want
to create and a company really likes that they maybe sponsor. If
you have big plans and need money for that and that company really
needs feature they might think
On 2006/03/10 12:19, Bryan Irvine wrote:
On 3/6/06, Bryan Irvine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The problem only happens with remote users that come in via T1 and
don't go through the gateway. The machines they are connecting to are
using 10.0.0.1 as it's gateway and seems to occassionaly choke
On 3/10/06, Craig Ryhorchuk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I wouldn't go quite that far. Corporate anywhere cares about charity.
No, they don't care about charity. They care about tax deductions.
There is a big difference between the two. I think this is a reason
why Theo is loathe to start a
On 3/10/06, Ted Unangst [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 3/10/06, Wijnand Wiersma [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Maybe I think too good about people/companies, but maybe if you want
to create and a company really likes that they maybe sponsor. If
you have big plans and need money for that and
I agree with those who have said that this thread is very largely a
waste of time with lots of talk and little action coming from it apart
from the few overt contributions to the power bill fund. Thanks to
those people.
For those of you who haven't thought of a way to contribute more than
your
On 3/10/06, Rod.. Whitworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I agree with those who have said that this thread is very largely a
waste of time with lots of talk and little action coming from it apart
from the few overt contributions to the power bill fund. Thanks to
those people.
For those of you
On 3/10/06, Stuart Henderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 2006/03/10 12:19, Bryan Irvine wrote:
On 3/6/06, Bryan Irvine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The problem only happens with remote users that come in via T1 and
don't go through the gateway. The machines they are connecting to are
On 3/10/06, Steven S [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bryan Irvine wrote:
...
...
It happened after we installed the carp firewalls, and seems to be
related to ICMP-Redirect coming from the real IP, as opposed to the
carp one the request went to.
...
Interesting, in my experiments carp
Bryan Irvine wrote:
On 3/10/06, Steven S [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bryan Irvine wrote:
...
...
It happened after we installed the carp firewalls, and seems to be
related to ICMP-Redirect coming from the real IP, as opposed to the
carp one the request went to.
...
Interesting, in my
Bryan Irvine wrote:
...
...
It happened after we installed the carp firewalls, and seems to be
related to ICMP-Redirect coming from the real IP, as opposed to the
carp one the request went to.
...
Interesting, in my experiments carp interfaces didn't send ICMP redirects at
all...
On Fri, 10 Mar 2006 21:53:23 +1100, Jonathan Gray wrote:
On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 09:18:10PM +1100, Rod.. Whitworth wrote:
On Fri, 10 Mar 2006 20:42:44 +1100, Jonathan Gray wrote:
On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 04:54:08PM +1100, Rod.. Whitworth wrote:
Today I received a D-Link DWL-G122 .
On 3/10/06, Diana Eichert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Talk is really cheap. Getting a business, either the one you work for or
a vendor, to donate hardware or funding is much harder.
Right.
Because for-profit businesses wants to see return on their investment,
thus a company will seldom give
On Sat, Mar 11, 2006 at 01:50:12PM +1100, Rod.. Whitworth wrote:
On Fri, 10 Mar 2006 21:53:23 +1100, Jonathan Gray wrote:
On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 09:18:10PM +1100, Rod.. Whitworth wrote:
On Fri, 10 Mar 2006 20:42:44 +1100, Jonathan Gray wrote:
On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 04:54:08PM +1100,
On Fri, 10 Mar 2006, Paolo Supino wrote:
Hi
I need to setup an IPSEC VPN between 2 locations. 1 location runs Cisco gear
(out of my control) and the other runs OpenBSD (my decision). I've never
setup a VPN between Cisco and OpenBSD before (I did between Cisco to Cisco
and OpenBSD to
Hi Diana
I did a different search in google and received a lot of irrelevant
hits :-( I looked up the mailing list archives but didn't find anything
concrete on the subject. I agree that more information is needed but I
kept it to the 2nd round of the emails on this subject because 1: I
Hi Matthew
Thanx for a great reply (even though I didn't supply information).
Here is some more information:
The OpenBSD side is simple: OpenBSD 3.8-stable (and 3.9 when it comes
out). Since I didn't have time to develop a policy I'm following the
other location's policy. The Cisco they have
Paolo Supino wrote:
I need to setup an IPSEC VPN between 2 locations. 1 location runs
Cisco gear (out of my control) and the other runs OpenBSD (my
decision). I've never setup a VPN between Cisco and OpenBSD before (I
did between Cisco to Cisco and OpenBSD to OpenBSD) and I was
wondering if
On Saturday 11 March 2006 07:22, Greg Thomas wrote:
On 3/10/06, Craig Ryhorchuk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I wouldn't go quite that far. Corporate anywhere cares about charity.
No, they don't care about charity. They care about tax deductions.
Or, in countries where charity donations arent
51 matches
Mail list logo
