accessible via my T-Mobile phone
On July 12, 2023 5:04:21 PM MDT, Chris Narkiewicz wrote:
>On Wed, Jul 12, 2023 at 03:19:17PM -0700, latin...@vcn.bc.ca wrote:
>> Is it working?
>> https://cdn.openbsd.org/pub/OpenBSD
>
>Works for me.
>
>Best regards,
>Chris Narkiewicz
>
On Wed, Jul 12, 2023 at 03:19:17PM -0700, latin...@vcn.bc.ca wrote:
> Is it working?
> https://cdn.openbsd.org/pub/OpenBSD
Works for me.
Best regards,
Chris Narkiewicz
Hello misc
Is it working?
https://cdn.openbsd.org/pub/OpenBSD
# syspatch
syspatch: cdn.openbsd.org: no address associated with name
Thanks
On Wed, Jul 12, 2023 at 06:28:47PM +0200, Matthias Pressfreund wrote:
> Why does 'cvs diff -D...' on the OPENBSD_7_2 branch
> include changes from before the given date?
Because cvs -D resolves to the most recent revision no later than
the given date, and the OPENBSD_7_2 tag contains files that
Why does 'cvs diff -D...' on the OPENBSD_7_2 branch
include changes from before the given date?
# cvs -qd anon...@anoncvs.spacehopper.org:/cvs checkout -rOPENBSD_7_2 -P
src/usr.sbin/httpd
U src/usr.sbin/httpd/Makefile
U src/usr.sbin/httpd/config.c
U src/usr.sbin/httpd/control.c
U
LOL, fair enough. Feel free to yell at me for this third question and
tell me to start a new thread.
How do you recommend I should proceed in diagnosing these "ndp info
overwritten" messages? It seems bizarre they started out of nowhere.
Before May 2, I didn't have any; but since, I get them
On Wed, Jul 12, 2023 at 10:59:13AM -0600, Zack Newman wrote:
> On 7/12/23 10:20, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> > You are missing something. It is called the KAME hack or embedded scope.
> > The KAME IPv6 implementation hijacks the 2nd 16bit addr part to store the
> > scope_id. In some cases this
On 7/12/23 10:20, Claudio Jeker wrote:
You are missing something. It is called the KAME hack or embedded scope.
The KAME IPv6 implementation hijacks the 2nd 16bit addr part to store the
scope_id. In some cases this embedded scope escapes in the addrs printed.
Especially the "ndp info
On Wed, Jul 12, 2023 at 08:23:36AM -0600, Zack Newman wrote:
> Before I raise a bug report, I wanted to pass it by @misc in case I'm
> confused. It appears there is an issue with link-local addresses at
> least as far as route(8) is concerned. Since May 2, /var/log/messages
> has been getting
Huh? Please read what I said. I literally mentioned RFC 4291 Section
2.5.6. Additionally, fe80::/10 _is_ defined by RFC 4291 Section 2.4 as
"Link-Local unicast" addresses. Section 2.5.6 does not redefine that but
instead states that, at least as of now, only fe80::/64 is allowed to be
used. The
On 2023-07-12 16:23, Zack Newman wrote:
> Before I raise a bug report, I wanted to pass it by @misc in case I'm
> confused. It appears there is an issue with link-local addresses at
> least as far as route(8) is concerned. Since May 2, /var/log/messages
> has been getting spammed with the
Before I raise a bug report, I wanted to pass it by @misc in case I'm
confused. It appears there is an issue with link-local addresses at
least as far as route(8) is concerned. Since May 2, /var/log/messages
has been getting spammed with the following:
router$ tail -6 /var/log/messages
Jul 12
Am 09.07.23 11:38 schrieb Tobias Heider:
> On Sat, Jul 08, 2023 at 11:08:31PM -0700, latin...@vcn.bc.ca wrote:
> (...)
> > ikev2 'roadwarrior' active esp \
> > from dynamic to any \
> > peer server_ip \
> > srcid roadwarrior \
> > dstid server_domain \
> >
13 matches
Mail list logo
