This happens to me as well and unfortunately I don't know how to remedy
this problem.
Regards,
Alden
Brian Candler wrote:
I'm getting the following when posting to 'misc'. Is this known and/or
intentional?
I'm not bcc'ing to 'ports' - honest!
Regards,
Brian.
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Envelope-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivery-date: Fri, 24 Nov 2006 14:50:00 +0000
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=mappit.linnet.org)
by localhost with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>)
id 1GncNM-0004P6-1m
for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Fri, 24 Nov 2006 14:50:00 +0000
Received: from pop3.linnet.org
by mappit.linnet.org with POP3 (fetchmail-6.3.2)
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (single-drop); Fri, 24 Nov 2006 14:50:00 +0000
(GMT)
Received: from [208.210.124.73] (helo=gold.pobox.com)
by mk-mx-1.b2b.uk.tiscali.com with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1GnbXf-000OfK-2r
for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Fri, 24 Nov 2006 13:56:35 +0000
Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by gold.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BDB2D0592
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Fri, 24 Nov 2006 08:56:57 -0500 (EST)
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: from shear.ucar.edu (shear.ucar.edu [192.43.244.163])
by gold.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7234D4AFE
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Fri, 24 Nov 2006 08:45:01 -0500 (EST)
Received: from openbsd.org (localhost.ucar.edu [127.0.0.1])
by shear.ucar.edu (8.13.8/8.13.6) with ESMTP id kAODAjW7022092
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Fri, 24 Nov 2006 06:10:45 -0700 (MST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.420 (Entity 5.420)
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2006 06:10:45 -0700
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Brian Candler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Message rejected
X-Security: message sanitized on shear.ucar.edu See http://www.impsec.org/email-tools/sanitizer-intro.html for details. $Revision: 1.147 $Date: 2004-10-02 11:16:26-07
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-Converted-To-Plain-Text: from multipart/mixed by demime 1.01d
X-Converted-To-Plain-Text: Alternative section used was text/plain
Your message to ports@openbsd.org was rejected because it
was not explicitly addressed to the ports mailing list.
If you intended to send a blind carbon copy, you must include a
valid Bcc: header.
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.4 (2006-07-25) on shear.ucar.edu
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_RCVD_HELO autolearn=unavailable version=3.1.4
Received: from wx-out-0506.google.com (wx-out-0506.google.com [66.249.82.235])
by shear.ucar.edu (8.13.8/8.13.6) with ESMTP id kAODAZrY018222
for <ports@openbsd.org>; Fri, 24 Nov 2006 06:10:36 -0700 (MST)
Received: by wx-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id t4so779681wxc
for <ports@openbsd.org>; Fri, 24 Nov 2006 05:10:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.90.105.20 with SMTP id d20mr7297753agc.1164373835788; Fri, 24
Nov 2006 05:10:35 -0800 (PST)
X-Forwarded-To: ports@openbsd.org, [EMAIL PROTECTED], misc@openbsd.org
X-Forwarded-For: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ports@openbsd.org, [EMAIL PROTECTED],
misc@openbsd.org
X-Gmail-Received: a3fb48cf952e9fe93945d81618c431fb9d58bb76
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: by 10.90.104.12 with SMTP id b12cs26662agc; Fri, 24 Nov 2006 05:10:35
-0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.70.33.7 with SMTP id g7mr10044496wxg.1164373835522; Fri, 24 Nov
2006 05:10:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from shear.ucar.edu (shear.ucar.edu [192.43.244.163])
by mx.google.com with ESMTP id i12si12406432wxd.2006.11.24.05.10.33;
Fri, 24 Nov 2006 05:10:35 -0800 (PST)
Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 192.43.244.163 is neither permitted nor
denied by domain of [EMAIL PROTECTED])
Received: from openbsd.org (localhost.ucar.edu [127.0.0.1])
by shear.ucar.edu (8.13.8/8.13.6) with ESMTP id kAOCjfa9014739; Fri, 24
Nov 2006 05:45:41 -0700 (MST)
Received: from rune.pobox.com (rune.pobox.com [208.210.124.79])
by shear.ucar.edu (8.13.8/8.13.6) with ESMTP id kAOCgCOY015553
for <misc@openbsd.org>; Fri, 24 Nov 2006 05:42:12 -0700 (MST)
Received: from rune (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by rune.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92A15964BF
for <misc@openbsd.org>; Fri, 24 Nov 2006 07:42:33 -0500 (EST)
Received: from mappit.linnet.org (212-74-113-67.static.dsl.as9105.com
[212.74.113.67]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client
certificate requested)
by rune.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5007A95325
for <misc@openbsd.org>; Fri, 24 Nov 2006 07:42:33 -0500 (EST)
Received: from brian
by mappit.linnet.org with local (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]>) id 1GnaOj-0002nE-FV
for misc@openbsd.org; Fri, 24 Nov 2006 12:43:17 +0000
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2006 12:43:17 +0000
From: Brian Candler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: misc@openbsd.org
Subject: Re: ipsecctl setting up multiple SAs
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11
X-Loop: misc@openbsd.org
Precedence: list
Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hans-Joerg Hoexer wrote:
more correct diff:
Cool. It occurs to me that the protocol ought to be included as well though:
e.g.
[IPsec-10.1.1.6:10000-10.1.1.1:1701-17]
That's because (in theory) you might have one SA for UDP and another SA for
TCP.
Other possibilities would be:
[IPsec-10.1.1.6-10.1.1.1-17] or
[IPsec-10.1.1.6:0-10.1.1.1:0-17]
# protocol specified but ports not specified
[IPsec-10.1.1.6-10.1.1.1] or
[IPsec-10.1.1.6:0-10.1.1.1:0-0]
# no protocol specified
Regards,
Brian.
