https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=248172
--- Comment #25 from Bjoern A. Zeeb ---
Opened an official review here: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D27324
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
freebs
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=248172
Bjoern A. Zeeb changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|kev...@freebsd.org |b...@freebsd.org
--- Comment #24
To view an individual PR, use:
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=(Bug Id).
The following is a listing of current problems submitted by FreeBSD users,
which need special attention. These represent problem reports covering
all versions including experimental development code and ob
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=248172
--- Comment #23 from Gert Doering ---
(In reply to Bjoern A. Zeeb from comment #22)
Bjoern, thanks for looking into this.
I have stared at the diff, and it looks like a reasonable approach that solves
both the "if people do not want IPv6,
Hi -
Michael Grimm wrote:
> Well, now I am able to omit this commit, but I would love to know what is
> going on, and why this commit may break 'authentication/certificate
> exchange/what so ever' of IMAP and SMTP/submission clients running in a VNET
> jail ...
It just came to my mind, that
Ronald Klop wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Nov 2020 14:37:33 +0100, Michael Grimm wrote:
>> P.S. How may I update a local svn copy and simultaneously omit commit 367740
>> from being applied, or how may I revert commit 367740, only?
>
>
> From the top of my head you can do something like:
>
> Assuming
On Sun, 22 Nov 2020 14:37:33 +0100, Michael Grimm
wrote:
Hi,
I am running 12.2-STABLE and VNET jails, one of which host a recent
Dovecot IMAP and a recent postfix SMTP server. Authentication is forced
via TLS/SSL for both services (ports 587 and 993). Setup is as follows:
extIF
Hi!
> Am 21.11.2020 um 23:42 schrieb Saad, Mark :
> This is sort of an abstract question. When using pf to only preform nat do I
> need to have at least one
> rule ? Can I omit the boiler plate "scrub rule " ? Other then allowing
> fragments and other fun
> stuff to get passed would this have
Hi,
I am running 12.2-STABLE and VNET jails, one of which host a recent Dovecot
IMAP and a recent postfix SMTP server. Authentication is forced via TLS/SSL for
both services (ports 587 and 993). Setup is as follows:
extIF0/pf/NAT <—> epairXa (bridge0) epairXb <-> jail
A recent upgrade
