Hello
I am trying to understand the behavior of BGPD. My setup is as below I'm
trying to understand when
BGPD will withdraw a route of a local interface.
/etc/hostname.vether0
inet 192.0.2.1 255.255.255.255
/etc/bgpd.conf
myas="65003"
AS $myas
router-id 1.0.0.1
network inet connected
fib-update
On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 07:24:20PM +0100, Tom Smyth wrote:
> as Bob Beck once said,
> "I want to be able to surf the web but I dont want my browser accessing my
> ssh keys..."
I think there's a Firefox extension for that. Themeable. Very modern.
Ew
On 8/25/20 3:27 PM, Aisha Tammy wrote:
> Hi all,
> I'm having some trouble getting wireguard to work nicely.
>
> Goal: Try to give public ipv6 addresses to my wireguard peers.
>
> How I've tried to tackle it is by giving the ip6 to the peer and
> then adding a route to the peer for the ipv6.
>
Hi all,
I'm having some trouble getting wireguard to work nicely.
Goal: Try to give public ipv6 addresses to my wireguard peers.
How I've tried to tackle it is by giving the ip6 to the peer and
then adding a route to the peer for the ipv6.
My vps (peer A) has ipv6 subet - 2001:19f0:5:5cd5::0/6
Thank you for suggestions on unveil. Very helpful.
Caution on running browser as root well received.
Thanks and regards,
Kihaguru.
On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 9:37 PM Stuart Henderson
wrote:
> On 2020-08-25, Kihaguru Gathura wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have tested on a 64 bit version of the same Th
Hello Everybody,
I was helping my friend to switch to new ip block and asn recently and
run into situation, when I need to announce a new network over the same
session
here's how i implemented this with quagga:
network xxx.xxx.xxx.0/24 route-map NEW
route-map NEW permit 30
set as-path prepen
Hello Kihaguru,
having a glancing look
I think this is because of unveil potentially
can you browse
/home/username/Downloads ?
unveil will restrict other parts of the filesystem that firefox
wouldnt typically need to acces...
as Bob Beck once said,
"I want to be able to surf the web but I dont wa
On 2020-08-25, Kihaguru Gathura wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have tested on a 64 bit version of the same ThinkPad T60 and error is
> consistent..
See /usr/local/share/doc/pkg-readmes/firefox about unveil
> However Firefox opens files from any folder as root on these same machines
> running OpenBSD 6.5.
R
On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 08:59:34PM +0300, Kihaguru Gathura wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have tested on a 64 bit version of the same ThinkPad T60 and error is
> consistent..
>
> However Firefox opens files from any folder as root on these same machines
> running OpenBSD 6.5.
Please don't run such software
Hi,
I have tested on a 64 bit version of the same ThinkPad T60 and error is
consistent..
However Firefox opens files from any folder as root on these same machines
running OpenBSD 6.5.
Kind regards,
Kihaguru.
On Sat, Aug 22, 2020 at 9:34 AM Kihaguru Gathura wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Firefox fails
On 8/25/20 10:33 AM, jungle Boogie wrote:
On Tue, 25 Aug 2020 at 00:05, Greg Thomas wrote:
I'm getting pretty old and struggle with stuff like this more and more these days but I
don't see what is "very difficult to follow" about the current layout, and I'm
not sure what's weird about it ei
On 08-25 01:55, Eldritch wrote:
> > Rather, I'm looking for a full separation between the users,
> > nothing shared but the obsd kernel and hardware, and no more overhead for
> > each one than X normally has, since each user is just running
> > flat normal X, but fully and independently of the othe
On Tue, 25 Aug 2020 at 08:21, Aner Perez wrote:
>
> Looks like you may have been playing with the font sizes in your browser
> preferences (e.g.
> General > Fonts and Colors > Advanced... > Monospace > Size).
I haven't changed from the default of what Firefox has. I just created
a new firefox p
On Tue, 25 Aug 2020 at 00:05, Greg Thomas wrote:
>
> I'm getting pretty old and struggle with stuff like this more and more these
> days but I don't see what is "very difficult to follow" about the current
> layout, and I'm not sure what's weird about it either?
>>See if these photos illustrat
>FWIW firefox (79.0) renders everything correctly at any width, including
>on "device simulation" mode. I have an old Android (5.1) device around
>with a 480x854 screen and Chrome 79 also displays everything properly.
Just tested on Firefox, both on desktop and mobile (android). On desktop the
i
On Tue, 25 Aug 2020 at 00:05, Greg Thomas wrote:
>
> I'm getting pretty old and struggle with stuff like this more and more these
> days but I don't see what is "very difficult to follow" about the current
> layout, and I'm not sure what's weird about it either?
See if these photos illustrate
Rather, I'm looking for a full separation between the users,
nothing shared but the obsd kernel and hardware, and no more overhead for
each one than X normally has, since each user is just running
flat normal X, but fully and independently of the other X user. Am I
mistaken in how I understand Xn
On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 09:48:04AM -, Stuart Henderson wrote:
>
> Guesses can be made, but a quick email might get a more accurate
> answer :) "Hi, I see you are padding your announcements at $IX and we
> are seeing you from other peers with the same path length, would you
> prefer we send to
On 2020-08-25, Remi Locherer wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 07:11:12AM -, Stuart Henderson wrote:
>> On 2020-08-24, Claudio Jeker wrote:
>> > On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 04:36:10PM +, Laura Smith wrote:
>> >> *> N 2001:db8:::/29 2001:db8::::1 100 100
>> >> 64512
On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 01:25:36AM -0700, Greg Thomas wrote:
> Interesting. I used my phone a bunch to check the FAQ when I got back to
> OpenBSD a couple of months ago, and I'm checking on my phone now
> (Android/Chrome), and it still looks fine.
A bit like the OP, I wasn't specific enough, apol
Interesting. I used my phone a bunch to check the FAQ when I got back to
OpenBSD a couple of months ago, and I'm checking on my phone now
(Android/Chrome), and it still looks fine.
On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 1:04 AM Zé Loff wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 12:04:57AM -0700, Greg Thomas wrote:
>
A am using OpenBSD-current on VMware ESXi.
The hostinfo command print no information with -q option. Is this a
expected behavior?
$ hostctl guestinfo.ip
172.19.200.100
$ hostctl -q guestinfo.ip
$
The following is an extract from man hostctl.
-q Don't ask for confirmation of any defa
On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 12:04:57AM -0700, Greg Thomas wrote:
> I'm getting pretty old and struggle with stuff like this more and more
> these days but I don't see what is "very difficult to follow" about the
> current layout, and I'm not sure what's weird about it either?
Indentation gets messe
Amazing answer, thanks Claudio and Sebastian. Will alter my rules
accordingly. It all makes sense now that I understand how PF
routing/filtering works under the hood, at least in principle.
On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 5:36 PM Sebastian Benoit wrote:
>
> Claudio Jeker(cje...@diehard.n-r-g.com) on 2020
On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 07:11:12AM -, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> On 2020-08-24, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 04:36:10PM +, Laura Smith wrote:
> >> *> N 2001:db8:::/29 2001:db8::::1 100 100
> >> 64512 65500 i
> >> * N 2001:db8:::/29
On 2020-08-24, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 04:36:10PM +, Laura Smith wrote:
>> *> N 2001:db8:::/29 2001:db8::::1 100 100 64512
>> 65500 i
>> * N 2001:db8:::/29 2001:db8::::2 100 100 65500
>> 65500 i
>>
>> In this ex
I'm getting pretty old and struggle with stuff like this more and more
these days but I don't see what is "very difficult to follow" about the
current layout, and I'm not sure what's weird about it either?
On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 10:09 PM Jungle Boogie
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I don't think it's intend
27 matches
Mail list logo
