Hello everybody,
I have 5 freebsd server in my system. I want to update freebsd from cvsup in
only one server and remaining 4 server from the server where it was updated
from cvsup. So please can you tell me how to do this process or I am waiting
for your suggesstion or what you recommend to do
* Dave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [070615 19:06] wrote:
> Hello,
>Firewalling nfs i was reading some client docs and i found out that
> FreeBSD has client support for the nfs v4. I was wondering if FreeBSD 6.2
> could act as an nfs v4 server?
There's a patchset from Rick Maclem(sp?) that might do i
* Jeremie Le Hen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [070615 01:07] wrote:
> Hi,
>
> It appears nearly impossible to firewall a NFS server on FreeBSD.
I would be nearly impossible if one didn't know much about NFS.
Care to rephrase your assertion?
> The reason is that NFS related daemons use RPC, which means t
On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 05:35:33PM -0700, Julian Elischer wrote:
> Christopher Cowart wrote:
> >On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 06:30:23PM -0400, Boris Kochergin wrote:
> >>Christopher Cowart wrote:
> >>>I have a server with two NICs:
> >>>
> >>>em0:169.229.79.139/25
> >>>vlan526:169.229.126.9/
Hello,
Firewalling nfs i was reading some client docs and i found out that
FreeBSD has client support for the nfs v4. I was wondering if FreeBSD 6.2
could act as an nfs v4 server?
Thanks.
Dave.
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists
Hi,
$subject at: http://people.freebsd.org/~mlaier/PF41/
As of today (20070616) I consider this to be BETA quality (at least).
Please test and provide me (and freebsd-pf@) with feedback (good or
else). If things work out well, I plan to commit this soon.
To make testing easier I'm working on
Ivan Voras wrote:
> If I insert "sleep 1" before IP gets assigned, it works, so it seems
> like there's a timing issue.
More data: changing the sleep command to "sleep 0.1" instead makes some
of the interfaces correctly configured and some are "lost" again. With
0.2 seconds, it seems that so far
Hi
I have a problem I can demonstrate and reproduce with the following script:
#!/bin/sh
ifconfig vlan600 destroy
ifconfig vlan600 create
ifconfig vlan600 vlan 600 vlandev fxp1
ifconfig vlan600 inet 10.20.0.1 netmask 255.255.255.0
ifconfig vlan601 destroy
ifconfig vlan601 create
ifconfig v
Christopher Cowart wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 06:30:23PM -0400, Boris Kochergin wrote:
>> Christopher Cowart wrote:
>>> I have a server with two NICs:
>>>
>>> em0:169.229.79.139/25
>>> vlan526:169.229.126.9/24
>>>
>>> The default gateway is 169.229.79.129. The router for the 126 s
Christopher Cowart wrote:
On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 06:30:23PM -0400, Boris Kochergin wrote:
Christopher Cowart wrote:
I have a server with two NICs:
em0:169.229.79.139/25
vlan526:169.229.126.9/24
The default gateway is 169.229.79.129. The router for the 126 subnet is
169.229.126.1.
Hello,
If anyone is interested i've got nfs going with a pf firewall on 6.2. I
use a block by default policy and the client is a linux client, running it's
iptables firewall, but it does work. I'm not sure about ipfw it's rule
syntax but pf and i think ipf this should do it. The trick is udp
On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 06:30:23PM -0400, Boris Kochergin wrote:
> Christopher Cowart wrote:
> >I have a server with two NICs:
> >
> >em0:169.229.79.139/25
> >vlan526:169.229.126.9/24
> >
> >The default gateway is 169.229.79.129. The router for the 126 subnet is
> >169.229.126.1.
> >
>
Hi. I've come across this problem but solved it with a PF rule of this
form, if that's an option for you:
pass out route-to (vlan256 169.229.126.1) from 169.229.126.9 to any
This tells PF to send all packets sent from 169.229.126.9 through the
vlan256 interface with a next-hop address of 169.2
Hello,
I have a server with two NICs:
em0:169.229.79.139/25
vlan526:169.229.126.9/24
The default gateway is 169.229.79.129. The router for the 126 subnet is
169.229.126.1.
netstat -rn:
| DestinationGatewayFlagsRefs Use Netif Expire
| default
On Vin, Iunie 15, 2007 7:27 pm, David DeSimone wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
>
> Peter Jeremy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>
>>> But the (somewhat weird) requirements are that the vlan interface on
>>> machine1 shouldn't have assigned IP address, but the second one sh
Hello,
I also want to firewall an nfs server. The box that it's running on uses
pf, it's a 6.2 box. I've got tcp port 2049 open, and am not sure what else
to open or what other daemons to start. I'm also uncertain as to whether
FreeBSD uses nfs v3 or v4? I want to export home directories to
On Jun 15, 2007, at 12:27 AM, Jeremie Le Hen wrote:
It appears nearly impossible to firewall a NFS server on FreeBSD.
Yes and no. It's quite easy to firewall NFS along with everything
else using a "default deny" ruleset. It's highly difficult to place
a restrictive firewall ruleset betwee
Bruce, good day.
Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 06:47:07PM +0100, Bruce M. Simpson wrote:
> I added the -p switch to mountd(8) a few years ago, as I needed to run a
> read-only NFS server exposed to the outside world; to firewall it I needed a
> deterministic RPC port number, which is what -p gives you. O
Eygene Ryabinkin wrote:
NFSD binds to the port nfsd (2049) and for my -CURRENT both lockd
and statd have '-p' options:
-
$ man rpc.lockd rpc.statd | grep -- -p
rpc.lockd [-d debug_level] [-g grace period] [-p port]
-p The -p option allow to force the daemon to bind to the speci
Synopsis: [dummynet] [patch] system hangs with dummynet queues
Responsible-Changed-From-To: freebsd-net->oleg
Responsible-Changed-By: oleg
Responsible-Changed-When: Fri Jun 15 17:21:30 UTC 2007
Responsible-Changed-Why:
take over.
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=113548
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Peter Jeremy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > But the (somewhat weird) requirements are that the vlan interface on
> > machine1 shouldn't have assigned IP address, but the second one
> > should.
> [...]
> > Is this kind of setup even supported?
>
> I
Here is a backtrace:
rtfree: 0xc3c5cca8 has 2 refs
KDB: stack backtrace:
db_trace_self_wrapper(c06b84de,e111dad4,c05d18f1,c06be1ff,c069bdd1,...)
at db_trace_self_wrapper+0x26
kdb_backtrace(c06be1ff,c069bdd1,c3c5cca8,2,c3c5cca8,...) at kdb_backtrace+0x29
rtfree(c3c5cca8,c3b3a010,10,c05d190b,c3c5
Jeremie, good day.
Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 09:27:35AM +0200, Jeremie Le Hen wrote:
> It appears nearly impossible to firewall a NFS server on FreeBSD.
> The reason is that NFS related daemons use RPC, which means they
> don't bind to a deterministic port. Only mountd(8) can be requested to
> bind to
Peter Jeremy wrote:
On 2007-Jun-14 01:55:20 +0200, Ivan Voras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
But the (somewhat weird) requirements are that the vlan interface on
machine1 shouldn't have assigned IP address, but the second one should.
...
Is this kind of setup even supported?
I don't see how it c
On 2007-Jun-14 01:55:20 +0200, Ivan Voras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>But the (somewhat weird) requirements are that the vlan interface on
>machine1 shouldn't have assigned IP address, but the second one should.
...
>Is this kind of setup even supported?
I don't see how it could be if machine1 is
Ah... put it will also failover all the OTHER carp interfaces on the box
when a physical interface goes down I had read the man page as that
being the ONLY feature of that sysctl variable.
net.inet.carp.preempt
Allow virtual hosts to preempt each other. It
is also used to failove
On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 09:27:35AM +0200, Jeremie Le Hen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> It appears nearly impossible to firewall a NFS server on FreeBSD.
> The reason is that NFS related daemons use RPC, which means they
> don't bind to a deterministic port. Only mountd(8) can be requested to
> bind to a speci
Hi,
It appears nearly impossible to firewall a NFS server on FreeBSD.
The reason is that NFS related daemons use RPC, which means they
don't bind to a deterministic port. Only mountd(8) can be requested to
bind to a specific port or fail with the -p command-line switch.
Is there any reason other
The following reply was made to PR kern/113548; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: Cristian KLEIN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Alexey Illarionov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: kern/113548: [dummynet] [patch] system hangs with dummynet queues
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 10:30:43 +0300
The following reply was made to PR kern/113548; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: Alexey Illarionov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Cristian KLEIN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: kern/113548: [dummynet] [patch] system hangs with dummynet queues
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 11:11:39 +0400
30 matches
Mail list logo
