Hi there,
I would like to know if you would be interested in acquiring our updated
Contacts of CentOS Users.
Each Contact contains:- Names, Title, Email, Phone, Company Name, Company
URL, Company physical address, SIC Code, Industry, Company Size (Revenue and
Employee). As per your requirem
On 1/16/19 6:56 PM, Steven Hartland wrote:
PS: are you going to file a PR ?
Yes here https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235005
You could also try setting net.pfsync.pfsync_buckets="1" in
/boot/loader.conf which reading the code should ensure all items are
processed in a
On 16/01/2019 17:33, Pete French wrote:
I have confirmed that pfsync is the culprit. Read on for details.
Excellent work. I;m home now, so won't get a chnace to out this into
practice until tomorrow unfortunately, but it's brilliant that you have
confirmed it.
I tried disabling pfsync and re
> I have confirmed that pfsync is the culprit. Read on for details.
Excellent work. I;m home now, so won't get a chnace to out this into
practice until tomorrow unfortunately, but it's brilliant that you have
confirmed it.
> I tried disabling pfsync and rebooting both nodes, they came up as
> MA
On 1/16/19 3:53 PM, Steven Hartland wrote:
I have confirmed that pfsync is the culprit. Read on for details.
I can't see how any of those would impact carp unless pf is now
incorrectly blocking carp packets, which seems unlikely from that commit.
Well I would agree, but nevertheless, here w
> On 15 Jan 2019, at 14:43, Pete French wrote:
>
>
>
> On 15/01/2019 10:24, Mark Blackman wrote:
>>> On 14 Jan 2019, at 18:44, Dave Cottlehuber wrote:
>>> haproxy does proper failover and allows custom health checks either via
>>> URL or real world traffic of external scripts. Traefik has lo
> I can't see how any of those would impact carp unless pf is now
> incorrectly blocking carp packets, which seems unlikely from that commit.
Just looking at the code it does seem unlikely, true - but my working
system does not run pf+pfsync and the non working one does, so it is
suspiciously in
> Indeed. I am seeing the same thing. Which revision of 12 are you running?
Ah, now that is very interesting - I wasnt expecting a reply so fast!
I am running r342847 - not though, that this is also the version I am running
on the two test systems which do work.
> I am currently (yesterday and t
I can't see how any of those would impact carp unless pf is now
incorrectly blocking carp packets, which seems unlikely from that commit.
Questions:
* Are you running a firewall?
* What does sysctl net.inet.carp report?
* What exactly does ifconfig report about your carp on both hosts?
* Ha
On 1/16/19 3:14 PM, Pete French wrote:
I just upgraded my pair of firewalls from 11 to 12, and am now in the
situation where CARP no longer works between them to faiilover the
virtual addresse. Both machines come up thinking that they
are the master. If I manually set the advskew on the interface
I just upgraded my pair of firewalls from 11 to 12, and am now in the
situation where CARP no longer works between them to faiilover the
virtual addresse. Both machines come up thinking that they
are the master. If I manually set the advskew on the interfaces to
a high number on what should be pass
11 matches
Mail list logo
