[CentOS] opened OpenSSL port

Main question: is it safe, to open a port for an openssl server? e.g.: server side - generate a self-signed cert. time openssl req -x509 -nodes -days 365 -newkey rsa:8192 -keyout mycert.pem -out mycert.pem openssl s_server -accept 52310 -cert mycert.pem Is it secure? - it could be DOSed' [

Re: [CentOS] opened OpenSSL port

On 02/27/11 1:50 AM, erikmccaskey64 wrote: > > Main question: is it safe, to open a port for an openssl server? > > e.g.: > > server side - generate a self-signed cert. > time openssl req -x509 -nodes -days 365 -newkey rsa:8192 -keyout > mycert.pem -out mycert.pem > openssl s_server -accept 52310

Re: [CentOS] IP6 Anyone?

On 27/02/11 06:46, Always Learning wrote: > Octets > > Thanks for pointing-out my misunderstanding. > > I'll remember 2 octets are really 2 characters (IBM's bytes) = 2 digits, > 4 octal numbers or 4 hexadecimal numbers. This is a confusing summary. 3 bits = 1 octal number (values 0-7) 4 bits = 1

[CentOS] Octet (was: IP6 Anyone?)

--On Saturday, February 26, 2011 9:04 PM + Always Learning wrote: > Are you sure 'octets' is correct? Those of us who've used older mainframes (such as the PDP-10) remember "byte" being a synonym for "bit field" and a

[CentOS] Standard location for hotplug-time hdparm invocation

I need to disable the spin-down on an external USB drive because it spins down spontaneously while in use. The drive forgets the spindown-disable state across power outage so I need to reissue the hdparm command with each boot or hotplug. Where should I put the hdparm command to do this? ___

Re: [CentOS] Octet (was: IP6 Anyone?)

On Sun, 2011-02-27 at 04:12 -0800, Kenneth Porter wrote: > Those of us who've used older mainframes (such as the PDP-10) remember > "byte" being a synonym for "bit field" and a byte could be any number of > bits, typically from 1 to 36 (on a 36-bit-wide machine). 7-bit and 9-bit > bytes were q

Re: [CentOS] IP6 Anyone?

On Sun, 2011-02-27 at 00:38 -0600, Larry Vaden wrote: > On Sat, Feb 26, 2011 at 2:12 PM, Always Learning wrote: > > > > Today I received an allocation of IP6 addresses for some servers. I can > > 'play' with the last 2 of the 8 IP6 address segments. > > I guess Will Rogers was correct after all

Re: [CentOS] IP6 Anyone?

On Sun, Feb 27, 2011 at 3:44 PM, Always Learning wrote: > > I was actually wrong. I can 'play' with not 2 but 4 groups of the IP6 > allocation. Golly, what can I do with 64 x 64 x 64 x 64 address > combinations?  Hire then out?  Have a different IP6 address for every > hour of the year? Put the IP

Re: [CentOS] IP6 Anyone?

On Sun, Feb 27, 2011 at 01:44:17PM +, Always Learning wrote: > I was actually wrong. I can 'play' with not 2 but 4 groups of the IP6 > allocation. Golly, what can I do with 64 x 64 x 64 x 64 address That's an odd combination. "64" is 6 bits, which has nothing to do with an IPv6 group. Many

Re: [CentOS] Standard location for hotplug-time hdparm invocation

On Sun, 27 Feb 2011, Kenneth Porter wrote: > To: CentOS mailing list > From: Kenneth Porter > Subject: [CentOS] Standard location for hotplug-time hdparm invocation > > I need to disable the spin-down on an external USB drive > because it spins down spontaneously while in use. The > drive for

Re: [CentOS] IP6 Anyone?

On 27/02/11 14:44, Always Learning wrote: > I was actually wrong. I can 'play' with not 2 but 4 groups of the IP6 > allocation. Golly, what can I do with 64 x 64 x 64 x 64 address > combinations? Hire then out? Have a different IP6 address for every > hour of the year? If you got allocated a /48

Re: [CentOS] IP6 Anyone?

On 2/27/11 8:00 AM, Rudi Ahlers wrote: > On Sun, Feb 27, 2011 at 3:44 PM, Always Learning wrote: >> >> I was actually wrong. I can 'play' with not 2 but 4 groups of the IP6 >> allocation. Golly, what can I do with 64 x 64 x 64 x 64 address >> combinations? Hire then out? Have a different IP6 add

Re: [CentOS] IP6 Anyone?

On 2/27/11 9:38 AM, David Sommerseth wrote: > > Yes, IPv6 gives every site a lot of more possibilities. And in IPv6 each NIC > can have multiple IPv6 addresses, without using aliasing which is needed for > IPv4. If you want to allocate 30 IPv6 addresses to one adapter, you may do so > very easily

Re: [CentOS] Could CentOS 5.5 on newer hardware make it freeze or shutdown?

On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 22:48, cwlists wrote: > On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 00:14, compdoc wrote: >>>I have built a new PC on which I've installed CentOS 5.5 64-bit (with >>>updates) which after some hours of running suddenly either hard freeze >>>or instant power off. >> >> Can you check a setting i

Re: [CentOS] Octet

On 02/27/11 5:32 AM, Always Learning wrote: > On Sun, 2011-02-27 at 04:12 -0800, Kenneth Porter wrote: > >> Those of us who've used older mainframes (such as the PDP-10) remember >> "byte" being a synonym for "bit field" and a byte could be any number of >> bits, typically from 1 to 36 (on a 36-bit

Re: [CentOS] IP6 Anyone?

On 02/27/11 9:16 AM, Les Mikesell wrote: > Is there any difference in efficiency in how well the NIC hardware filters the > assigned addresses? NIC's work in MAC addresses, not IP. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailm

[CentOS] Recover botched drdb gfs2 setup .

Hi. The short story... Rush job, never done clustered file systems before, vlan didn't support multicast. Thus I ended up with drbd working ok between the two servers but cman / gfs2 not working, resulting in what was meant to be a drbd primary/primary cluster being a primary/secondary cluster unt

[CentOS] log time formats - where is this defined

One of my servers is using ISO datetime formats (2011-02-27T15:22:15.519857-05:00) in the logs the rest use the default redhat/CentOS format (Feb 27 15:10:21). After a couple of hours searching google I cannot find where this is defined. I know I changed it some months ago as an experiment but f

Re: [CentOS] log time formats - where is this defined

> -Original Message- > From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On > Behalf Of Rob Kampen > Sent: Sunday, February 27, 2011 3:34 PM > To: CentOS mailing list > Subject: [CentOS] log time formats - where is this defined > > One of my servers is using ISO datetime f

Re: [CentOS] log time formats - where is this defined

On Sun, 27 Feb 2011 15:33:57 -0500 Rob Kampen wrote: > One of my servers is using ISO datetime formats > (2011-02-27T15:22:15.519857-05:00) in the logs > the rest use the default redhat/CentOS format (Feb 27 15:10:21). > After a couple of hours searching google I cannot find where this is > def

Re: [CentOS] IP6 Anyone?

On 2/27/11 12:50 PM, John R Pierce wrote: > On 02/27/11 9:16 AM, Les Mikesell wrote: >> Is there any difference in efficiency in how well the NIC hardware filters >> the >> assigned addresses? > > NIC's work in MAC addresses, not IP. Sort-of. Most NICs know enough about IPv4 multicast to at leas

Re: [CentOS] Octet

--On Sunday, February 27, 2011 10:48 AM -0800 John R Pierce wrote: > the PDP-10 was in fact considered a mainframe in the 1960s. They were > more commonly called DECsystem-10, or KA10, KL10. the CPU was multiple > cabinets, the KL10 supported up to 4 megawords of ram (where a word was > 36 bi

Re: [CentOS] Standard location for hotplug-time hdparm invocation

--On Sunday, February 27, 2011 3:37 PM + Keith Roberts wrote: > Not sure about hotpluging, but for the reboot > /etc/rc.d/rc.local might be a good place to try this: Googling turned up that suggestion a lot. But I realized that since this is a backup drive, it would be more useful to do it

Re: [CentOS] Standard location for hotplug-time hdparm invocation

BTW, this came up because the drive is a Seagate GoFlex Desk which spins down and then won't come back up reliably. Googling around turned up this patch that looks like it shows up in a much later kernel, no earlier than 2.6.24: __

Re: [CentOS] Octet

On Sun, 2011-02-27 at 10:48 -0800, John R Pierce wrote: > the PDP-10 was in fact considered a mainframe in the 1960s. They were > more commonly called DECsystem-10, or KA10, KL10. the CPU was multiple > cabinets, the KL10 supported up to 4 megawords of ram (where a word was > 36 bits). The

Re: [CentOS] Recover botched drdb gfs2 setup .

Hi. No worries it was a firewall issue. Not quite as bad as I though J . Greg Machin Systems Administrator - Linux Infrastructure Group, Information Services From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Machin, Greg Sent: Monday, 28 February 2011 9:33

[CentOS] Centos 6

Any word on approximate release date of Centos 6? Cheers, JD ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Centos 6

On Sun, Feb 27, 2011 at 07:13:32PM -0800, JD wrote: > Any word on approximate release date of Centos 6? > > Cheers, > > JD Seriously? Seriously?! Ray ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Centos 6

On Feb 27, 2011, at 7:13 PM, JD wrote: > Any word on approximate release date of Centos 6? > Wow, I'm stunned. - aurf ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Centos 6

On Sun, Feb 27, 2011 at 07:13:32PM -0800, JD wrote: > Any word on approximate release date of Centos 6? Sometime in 2011 would be a fair bet. John -- Anybody can win unless there happens to be a second entry. -- George Ade (1866

Re: [CentOS] Centos 6

Am 28.02.2011 um 04:15 schrieb Ray Van Dolson: > On Sun, Feb 27, 2011 at 07:13:32PM -0800, JD wrote: >> Any word on approximate release date of Centos 6? >> >> Cheers, >> >> JD > > Seriously? Seriously?! It's like Sesame Street, you know... There's a new audience coming every week ;-) ___

Re: [CentOS] Centos 6

On Feb 27, 2011, at 7:13 PM, JD wrote: > Any word on approximate release date of Centos 6? > Seriously though. Nothing wrong with asking. Its been discussed "several" time to an order of magnitude. No word, not even a peep, at least that I can gather. We're all frustrated in anticipation so

Re: [CentOS] Centos 6

JD wrote: > Any word on approximate release date of Centos 6? > Yes [1]. [1] http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/2011-February/106135.html ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Centos 6

On Sun, Feb 27, 2011 at 07:29:16PM -0800, aurfal...@gmail.com wrote: > > We're all frustrated in anticipation so I daily check the main page. "We" are? Funny, I don't feel frustrated. John -- The machine has got to be accepted,

Re: [CentOS] Centos 6 - OT

On Sun, 2011-02-27 at 21:46 -0600, John R. Dennison wrote: > The machine has got to be accepted, but it is probably better > to accept it rather as one accepts a drug -- that is, grudgingly > and suspiciously. Like a drug, the machine is useful, dangerous, > and habit-forming. The oftener one s

Re: [CentOS] Centos 6 - OT

On Feb 27, 2011, at 8:00 PM, Always Learning wrote: > > On Sun, 2011-02-27 at 21:46 -0600, John R. Dennison wrote: > >> The machine has got to be accepted, but it is probably better >> to accept it rather as one accepts a drug -- that is, grudgingly >> and suspiciously. Like a drug, the machine i

Re: [CentOS] Centos 6 - OT

On Sun, 2011-02-27 at 20:04 -0800, aurfal...@gmail.com wrote: > Ok that was weird. The book or my posting or both ? -- With best regards, Paul. England, EU. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Centos 6 - OT

On Feb 27, 2011, at 8:07 PM, Always Learning wrote: > > On Sun, 2011-02-27 at 20:04 -0800, aurfal...@gmail.com wrote: > >> Ok that was weird. > > The book or my posting or both ? Really? ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.o

Re: [CentOS] Centos 6

On 02/27/2011 07:29 PM, aurfal...@gmail.com wrote: > On Feb 27, 2011, at 7:13 PM, JD wrote: > >> Any word on approximate release date of Centos 6? >> > Seriously though. > > Nothing wrong with asking. > > Its been discussed "several" time to an order of magnitude. > > No word, not even a peep, at l

Re: [CentOS] Centos 6

On Sun, 2011-02-27 at 19:51 -0800, JD wrote: > OK, as a measuring yardstick: approximately how many > months after RHEL5's release date was Centos 5 released? > That might give people an approximate idea. > Currently, I have no RHEL installed. I just joined this list to > enquire about RHEL 6. S

Re: [CentOS] Centos 6

On Sun, Feb 27, 2011 at 07:51:49PM -0800, JD wrote: > On 02/27/2011 07:29 PM, aurfal...@gmail.com wrote: > > On Feb 27, 2011, at 7:13 PM, JD wrote: > > > >> Any word on approximate release date of Centos 6? > >> > > Seriously though. > > > > Nothing wrong with asking. > > > > Its been discussed "se

Re: [CentOS] Centos 6

On Sun, Feb 27, 2011 at 07:51:49PM -0800, JD wrote: > On 02/27/2011 07:29 PM, aurfal...@gmail.com wrote: > > On Feb 27, 2011, at 7:13 PM, JD wrote: > > > >> Any word on approximate release date of Centos 6? > > Nothing wrong with asking. > > > > Its been discussed "several" time to an order of magn

Re: [CentOS] Centos 6

>> > OK, as a measuring yardstick: approximately how many > months after RHEL5's release date was Centos 5 released? > That might give people an approximate idea. "It's difficult to make predictions, especially about the future". While extrapolating from past data is legitimate, it does not appl

Re: [CentOS] Octet - off topic

On Sun, 2011-02-27 at 22:38 -0600, Larry Vaden wrote: > On Sun, Feb 27, 2011 at 5:48 PM, Always Learning wrote: > > > > At my second computer job in 1967 on a Honeywell H-120 (a baby machine > > with 3 tapes which took 1 hour to do a Cobol compilation ... > I have always hoped to find someone w

Re: [CentOS] Centos 6 - OT

> On Sun, 2011-02-27 at 21:46 -0600, John R. Dennison wrote: > >> The machine has got to be accepted, but it is probably better >> to accept it rather as one accepts a drug -- that is, grudgingly >> and suspiciously. Like a drug, the machine is useful, dangerous, >> and habit-forming. The oftener