Re: PF Seems To Reload Its Default Rules Unexpectedly

On Mon, 9 Mar 2009 19:06:10 -0700 Hilco Wijbenga wrote: > 2009/3/9 J.C. Roberts : > > On Mon, 9 Mar 2009 09:07:51 -0700 Hilco Wijbenga > > wrote: > > > >> 2009/3/9 J.C. Roberts : > > > > I doubt your ISP only has 254 customers, so they are most likely > > using more than just the stated 192.168.

Re: acpitz0: THRM: failed to read _TMP

> I'm seeing the following messages logged to the console: > > acpitz0: THRM: failed to read _TMP > acpitz0: THRM: failed to read temp > > (both lines are repeated many times). > > It looks like OpenBSD (4.4) is unable to read the CPU temperature > which would explain why my previously whisper q

You have just received a virtual postcard from a friend !

You have just received a virtual postcard from a friend ! . You can pick up your postcard at the following web address: . Click here to pick up your postcard . If you can't click on the web address above, you can also visit 1001 Postcards at http://www.postcards.org/postcards/ and enter your

Re: PF Seems To Reload Its Default Rules Unexpectedly

2009/3/9 J.C. Roberts : > On Mon, 9 Mar 2009 09:07:51 -0700 Hilco Wijbenga > wrote: > >> 2009/3/9 J.C. Roberts : >> > On Sun, 8 Mar 2009 16:01:57 -0700 Hilco Wijbenga >> > wrote: >> > >> >> I have pf running on my firewall box and I'm experiencing some >> >> strange behaviour. After several hours

Re: Where is "Secure by default" ?

L. V. Lammert wrote: > > PMFJI, but isn't the issue simpler than that? If he has a MiTM attack via > arp, doesn't that mean the attacker has access to the local subnet? > Remote access to a machine on that subnet would do. It does not have to be physical. Probably a compromised Windows box that

Re: relayd ssl to ssl not working. Sends http request to https port

Sorry to dredge this back up from a month ago, but I wanted to get some clarification. If I wanted to have a gateway that accepts https connections from clients and then proxies them over to https servers am I just out of luck? Is it that it cannot be done at all, or just that it cannot be done w

Re: arp MiTM

Hello Misc, Theo and other, thanks. -- Best regards, irix mailto:i...@ukr.net

Re: PF Seems To Reload Its Default Rules Unexpectedly

On Mon, 9 Mar 2009 09:07:51 -0700 Hilco Wijbenga wrote: > 2009/3/9 J.C. Roberts : > > On Sun, 8 Mar 2009 16:01:57 -0700 Hilco Wijbenga > > wrote: > > > >> I have pf running on my firewall box and I'm experiencing some > >> strange behaviour. After several hours (this may even be 24 hours) > >> o

Re: generating passwords (crypt, md5)

2009/2/28 Stuart Henderson : > On 2009-02-28, Juan Miscaro wrote: >> What is the standard way of generating hashes (for me it's for >> passwords) in OpenBSD? B I once used userdbpw but it's package >> (courier-authlib-userdb) conflicts with another package I have >> installed. B So I'm looking for

Re: IPSEC: certificate ignored

Hi, thanks for answering to Mitja and you. On Sat, 07.03.2009 at 19:28:09 +0100, Heinrich Rebehn wrote: > Am 06.03.2009 um 22:56 schrieb Toni Mueller: >> 223644.842092 Plcy 30 keynote_cert_obtain: failed to open "/etc/ >> isakmpd/keynote//u...@road-warrior/credentials" >> 223644.842516 Default

Re: Where is "Secure by default" ?

On 9 March 2009 P3. 21:29:47 Juan Miscaro wrote: > 2009/3/9 bofh : > > On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 11:48 AM, - Tethys wrote: > >> Maybe it's a troll. Maybe not. Can we afford to be turning away > >> potential users on the off chance? > > > > OpenBSD exists solely for the developers > > That's a silly t

Re: x11 problems with lenovo w500

On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 11:56 AM, Didier Wiroth wrote: > > b) Now, if I bypass the authentication and boot directly into openbsd. > The openbsd kernel is loaded, but now I'm _NOT_ able to start X11. > Here is the NON-working Xorg.0.log: > > Here is th

Re: arp MiTM

On Mon, Mar 09, 2009 at 02:34:07PM +, michal wrote: > Jacob Yocom-Piatt wrote: > >irix wrote: > >>Hello Misc, > >> > >> I am a customer and not the network administrator, and someone in > >> the network makes MiTM attack, a network of billet in the > >> uncontrolled swithes and

Re: arp MiTM

On Mon, Mar 09, 2009 at 07:18:59PM +0200, irix wrote: | Hello Paul, | | The problem is that, I am not an administrator of the network. | I am a client of the network. The network is built on the unmanaged switches. | ISP to the problem do not care, so interested in this patch. As has been

Re: Where is "Secure by default" ?

On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 11:48 AM, - Tethys wrote: > On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 2:56 PM, Marco Peereboom wrote: >> because it is. > > And therein lies some of the problem with the OpenBSD community. Don't > get me wrong, I like OpenBSD, I use it, and have donated to the > project. But here we have a us

Re: Where is "Secure by default" ?

On Mar 09 15:48:05, - Tethys wrote: > Maybe it's a troll. Maybe not. Take a wild guess. > Can we afford to be turning away > potential users on the off chance? Assuming that "we" means the dev team, of which neither you or me are members, then yes, we can. > -- > The greatest shortcoming of th

Re: Bug OpenBGPD, IPv6 peer gets cleared, never gets up again

Hi Henning and Claudio, Claudio Jeker wrote: > Btw. does this only happen with full IPv6 feeds or are a few > announcements already enough? We have two test setups. One actually includes real peers, none sending a full table though. The other one is a setup in our lab, with various routers we cou

You have been unsubscribed from the Ektiposi mailing list

Re: Where is "Secure by default" ?

2009/3/9 bofh : > On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 11:48 AM, - Tethys wrote: >> Maybe it's a troll. Maybe not. Can we afford to be turning away >> potential users on the off chance? > > OpenBSD exists solely for the developers That's a silly thing to say. -- jm

Re: arp MiTM

On 2009-03-09, irix wrote: > Hello Misc, > > On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 1:11 PM, irix wrote: > > >>ARP is insecure, no matter how many patches you apply or how many hacks you >>try. If you want something more secure, use 802.1X, use security on the >>switch, use IPv6+IPSec/SeND, etc. > > Sorry, if

Re: Where is "Secure by default" ?

On 2009-03-09, Felipe Alfaro Solana wrote: > On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 3:36 PM, irix wrote: > >> Hello Misc, >> >> In www.openbsd.org wrote "Only two remote holes in the default >> install, in more than 10 years!", this not true. I using OpenBSD >> like customer, not like administrator.

Re: Where is "Secure by default" ?

Paul Irofti wrote: > Hello Mr. Troll, thanks for flaming by. Have a good day! Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity. # Han

Re: arp MiTM

> The problem is that, I am not an administrator of the network. > I am a client of the network. The network is built on the unmanaged > switches. > ISP to the problem do not care, so interested in this patch. May you > help with patch on OpenBSD ? The network is built wrong. No, we will

Re: Kernel Panic on 6th March i386 build

Hi Daniel and Misc@, On Sun, 08 Mar 2009 06:29:22 +0700, Daniel Ouellet wrote: Claudio Jeker wrote: Fell free to disagree, that's fair. Sorry, I don't get it a non-developer tries to educate a developer about how kernel crashes should be reported? Sorry most of your standpoints are j

Re: Where is "Secure by default" ?

On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 11:48 AM, - Tethys wrote: > And therein lies some of the problem with the OpenBSD community. Don't > get me wrong, I like OpenBSD, I use it, and have donated to the Depends on whether it is a valid concern. I believe it was pointed out in the other thread that the patch do

Re: arp MiTM

On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 9:15 AM, Eric Furman wrote: > On Mon, 9 Mar 2009 16:54:27 +0100, "Felipe Alfaro Solana" > said: >> On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 1:11 PM, irix wrote: >> >> > Hello Misc, >> > >> > How to protect your server from such attacks without the use of static arp >> > entries? >> > By f

Re: arp MiTM

Hello Paul, The problem is that, I am not an administrator of the network. I am a client of the network. The network is built on the unmanaged switches. ISP to the problem do not care, so interested in this patch. May you help with patch on OpenBSD ? Monday, March 9, 2009, 3:02:23 PM, you

rack mounted intro server lab

I've run an intial pilot of a Soekris net4801 with OpenBSD 4.4, using gpioctl to turn on and off other machines and netboot them for console installs. The notes below are a mess and there just to record until they can be arranged to make sense: http://www-personal.umich.edu/~lars/DES/des.

Re: PF Seems To Reload Its Default Rules Unexpectedly

>Ah, different semantics. :-) By "default rules" I mean whatever pf >does *without* an /etc/pf.conf. Probably something like "block all". Without any rules, pf does not block anything. come on.. stop making assumptions.

Re: Kernel Panic on 6th March i386 build

Hi All, On Sun, 08 Mar 2009 18:01:50 +0700, FRLinux wrote: On Sat, Mar 7, 2009 at 11:29 PM, Daniel Ouellet wrote: I was clearly out of place. Same to you Steph, I shouldn't have reacted so quickly to your email address and have wrongly concluded to an other Linux quick miss place question

Re: PF Seems To Reload Its Default Rules Unexpectedly

Dag Richards wrote: >> In sort my first guess is your IP is changing every 24 hours or so due >> to your service provider using dynamic addressing (and trying to >> prevent you from having a particular IP for too long). If I'm right, >> then your problem is that pf is holding on to the old rules f

Resolved - Re: "device not configured" in SSH chroot

Moving the chroot to a new CF with a different partitioning scheme meant that it ended up on one mounted 'nodev', changing the mount options fixed the problem. -Lars

Re: PF Seems To Reload Its Default Rules Unexpectedly

2009/3/9 J.C. Roberts : > On Sun, 8 Mar 2009 16:01:57 -0700 Hilco Wijbenga > wrote: > >> I have pf running on my firewall box and I'm experiencing some strange >> behaviour. After several hours (this may even be 24 hours) of >> functioning normally, pf seems to reload its default rules which means

Canada immigration

WARNING: contains undecipherable part Received: from unicornia896a8 (adsl-245-183-192-81.adsl2.iam.net.ma [81.192.183.245]) by mail.cashcom.ma (Postfix/TrioOS) with ESMTP id 37DBD1200A3AE for ; Mon, 9 Mar 2009 16:12:59 + (WET) From: "Agence Casa ElFirdaous" To: Subject: Cana

Re: Where is "Secure by default" ?

At 04:50 PM 3/9/2009 +0100, Felipe Alfaro Solana wrote: On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 3:36 PM, irix wrote: > Hello Misc, > > In www.openbsd.org wrote "Only two remote holes in the default > install, in more than 10 years!", this not true. I using OpenBSD > like customer, not like administ

Re: Where is "Secure by default" ?

If this issue matters to you and you want the OS to fix it you are doing it wrong. ARP has some inherent "qualities" that are questionable. You can hack ARP all up but it won't ever fix it so instead one needs to embrace the issues and fix them where it makes sense. This is not about an issue wi

Re: Where is "Secure by default" ?

On Mon, Mar 09, 2009 at 03:48:05PM +, - Tethys wrote: > On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 2:56 PM, Marco Peereboom wrote: > > because it is. > > And therein lies some of the problem with the OpenBSD community. Don't > get me wrong, I like OpenBSD, I use it, and have donated to the > project. But here we

Re: arp MiTM

On Mon, 9 Mar 2009 16:54:27 +0100, "Felipe Alfaro Solana" said: > On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 1:11 PM, irix wrote: > > > Hello Misc, > > > > How to protect your server from such attacks without the use of static arp > > entries? > > By freebsd 5.0 patch was written arp_antidote ( > > http://freecap

Re: Kernel Panic on 6th March i386 build

Stefan Sperling wrote: On Sat, Mar 07, 2009 at 06:29:22PM -0500, Daniel Ouellet wrote: Claudio Jeker wrote: Fell free to disagree, that's fair. Sorry, I don't get it a non-developer tries to educate a developer about how kernel crashes should be reported? Sorry most of your standpoints are ju

Re: Where is "Secure by default" ?

- Tethys wrote: On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 2:56 PM, Marco Peereboom wrote: because it is. And therein lies some of the problem with the OpenBSD community. Don't get me wrong, I like OpenBSD, I use it, and have donated to the project. But here we have a user that has security concerns, and

Re: PF Seems To Reload Its Default Rules Unexpectedly

On Mon, Mar 09, 2009 at 08:10:00AM -0700, Dag Richards wrote: > Interesting, that is brings up a question for me... what do we do in > this case? My ISP seems to be content to give the same ip back over and > over again. If they did not is there something I can do besides monitor > my $ext_

"device not configured" in SSH chroot

I've set up a chroot account using ssh's ChrootDirectory[1] keyword on OpenBSD 4.4 on a Soekris (i386) net4801. It works nicely, except that I get some device errors in the chroot, but not the regular accounts. Upon connecting with SSH with the chrooted account, there is an error about tty:

Re: arp MiTM

Hello Misc, On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 1:11 PM, irix wrote: >ARP is insecure, no matter how many patches you apply or how many hacks you >try. If you want something more secure, use 802.1X, use security on the >switch, use IPv6+IPSec/SeND, etc. Sorry, if I been rude. I not administartor of ne

Re: NFS or SAMBA ?

On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 4:56 PM, Henning Brauer wrote: > * Guillermo Bernaldo de Quiros Maraver [2009-02-13 > 21:06]: > > if you have a shared network between WINDOWS and OpenBSD i recommend > > Samba if not, NFS > > > > NFS => Insecure > > SAMBA => Have a problems, but, it's more secure

Re: Where is "Secure by default" ?

On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 3:36 PM, irix wrote: > In www.openbsd.org wrote "Only two remote holes in the default > install, in more than 10 years!", this not true. I using OpenBSD > like customer, not like administrator. So it wasn't default install anymore, was it ? > And my OpenBSD w

Re: Where is "Secure by default" ?

If FreeBSD solve your problem, use it. On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 12:10 PM, bofh wrote: > On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 10:36 AM, irix wrote: >> When this is introduced in OpenBSD, so you can say with confidence >> that the system really "Secure by default" ? > > Then shouldn't you be using freebsd, a

Re: Where is "Secure by default" ?

On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 2:56 PM, Marco Peereboom wrote: > because it is. And therein lies some of the problem with the OpenBSD community. Don't get me wrong, I like OpenBSD, I use it, and have donated to the project. But here we have a user that has security concerns, and rather than either admit

Re: arp MiTM

On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 1:11 PM, irix wrote: > Hello Misc, > > How to protect your server from such attacks without the use of static arp > entries? > By freebsd 5.0 patch was written arp_antidote ( > http://freecap.ru/if_ether.c.patch), > somebody could port it on openbsd? > > Also, in freebsd

Re: Where is "Secure by default" ?

On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 3:36 PM, irix wrote: > Hello Misc, > > In www.openbsd.org wrote "Only two remote holes in the default > install, in more than 10 years!", this not true. I using OpenBSD > like customer, not like administrator. And my OpenBSD were attacked, > by simple MiTM att

Re: NFS or SAMBA ?

* Guillermo Bernaldo de Quiros Maraver [2009-02-13 21:06]: > if you have a shared network between WINDOWS and OpenBSD i recommend > Samba if not, NFS > > NFS => Insecure > SAMBA => Have a problems, but, it's more secure. that is the most ridiculous bullshit I have ever read here in som

Re: pf does not log all block

Thank you all. Thanks to your indications, i've found my problem. It was just a block line (when i really looked at it, i still ask why she was here) which was at the end of my block group. I removed it, and my logging worked fine. Pierre, yes i know all these things. I use pf since OpenBSD 3.4,

Re: PF Seems To Reload Its Default Rules Unexpectedly

On 3/9/09 2:05 AM, J.C. Roberts wrote: On Sun, 8 Mar 2009 16:01:57 -0700 Hilco Wijbenga wrote: I have pf running on my firewall box and I'm experiencing some strange behaviour. After several hours (this may even be 24 hours) of functioning normally, pf seems to reload its default rules which

Re: Where is "Secure by default" ?

On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 10:36 AM, irix wrote: > When this is introduced in OpenBSD, so you can say with confidence > that the system really "Secure by default" ? Then shouldn't you be using freebsd, and go bug them? -- http://www.glumbert.com/media/shift http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGvHN

Re: arp MiTM

On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 10:34 AM, michal wrote: > Funny, I would say you are being more rude then he is Why? Jacob was simply telling him why he was rude. -- http://www.glumbert.com/media/shift http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGvHNNOLnCk "This officer's men seem to follow him merely out of idle

Re: Where is "Secure by default" ?

How do you define remote holes? Which remotely accessible services were compromised by this? "Hey, somone hijacked facebook and I entered my password and submitted it to them AND OPENBSD DID NOT SAVE ME OMG!!! OpenBSD is so insecure". There may or may not be a reason for applying sth

Técnico de Prevenção de Riscos Laborais

Ticnico em Prevengco de Riscos Laborais Todas as empresas necessitam de um plano de riscos laborais Obtenha um diploma com futuro Acesso 24 horas ao nosso campus virtual Com completo material didactico Um certificado que avaliza os seus conhecimentos Em menos de 6 meses! CLICK JA se nco qu

Re: Where is "Secure by default" ?

On Mon, Mar 09, 2009 at 04:36:47PM +0200, irix wrote: > Hello Misc, > > In www.openbsd.org wrote "Only two remote holes in the default > install, in more than 10 years!", this not true. I using OpenBSD > like customer, not like administrator. And my OpenBSD were attacked, > by si

Re: arp MiTM

On Mon, Mar 09, 2009 at 02:34:07PM +, michal wrote: > Jacob Yocom-Piatt wrote: >> irix wrote: >>> Hello Misc, >>> >>> I am a customer and not the network administrator, and someone in >>> the network makes MiTM attack, a network of billet in the >>> uncontrolled swithes and

Re: Where is "Secure by default" ?

because it is. On Mon, Mar 09, 2009 at 04:36:47PM +0200, irix wrote: > Hello Misc, > > In www.openbsd.org wrote "Only two remote holes in the default > install, in more than 10 years!", this not true. I using OpenBSD > like customer, not like administrator. And my OpenBSD were att

Where is "Secure by default" ?

Hello Misc, In www.openbsd.org wrote "Only two remote holes in the default install, in more than 10 years!", this not true. I using OpenBSD like customer, not like administrator. And my OpenBSD were attacked, by simple MiTM attack in arp protocol. How then can we talk about the "

Re: arp MiTM

Jacob Yocom-Piatt wrote: irix wrote: Hello Misc, I am a customer and not the network administrator, and someone in the network makes MiTM attack, a network of billet in the uncontrolled swithes and ISP will not translate everything on the managed. Therefore, software imp

Re: arp MiTM

irix wrote: Hello Misc, I am a customer and not the network administrator, and someone in the network makes MiTM attack, a network of billet in the uncontrolled swithes and ISP will not translate everything on the managed. Therefore, software implementation of this patch fo

Re: Upgrade on non-live disk

Hi! On Thu, Mar 05, 2009 at 12:09:31PM +1030, Damon McMahon wrote: >Tue, 03 Mar 2009 07:17:56 -0500 : >>On 3/2/2009 7:31 PM, Damon McMahon wrote: >> Is it possible/wise to follow the upgrade instructions on a non-live >> OpenBSD disk mounted on /altroot? I have a second drive I use as a >>

Re: arp MiTM

Hello Misc, I am a customer and not the network administrator, and someone in the network makes MiTM attack, a network of billet in the uncontrolled swithes and ISP will not translate everything on the managed. Therefore, software implementation of this patch for openbsd. O

Re: Bug OpenBGPD, IPv6 peer gets cleared, never gets up again

* Arnoud Vermeer [2009-03-08 22:54]: > No, this is not the only session. Here is the full config, I hope it helps: > > Things start going wrong when I add the following to a v6 session: > tcp md5sig password hondjes wait. removing tcpmd5 fixes the problem? you gotta be kidding? this is on OpenBS

ichiic0 errors on 4.3

Hi I have been noticing these kernel messages once in a while on my i386 machine running 4.3 (+ all patches up to date). The drive is brand new 500GB SATA. ichiic0: exec: op 1, addr 0x2e, cmdlen 1, len 1, flags 0x00: timeout, status 0x0 ichiic0: abort failed, status 0x0 ichiic0: exec: op 1, ad

Re: Bug OpenBGPD, IPv6 peer gets cleared, never gets up again

On Mon, Mar 09, 2009 at 12:25:12PM +0100, Arnoud Vermeer wrote: > We commented out the following lines, to test if it is indeed an > End-of-RIB-marker that is acting up, and it turns out it isn't. > > in rde.c line 2613 we commented out this: > >if (peer->capa_received.restart && peer->capa_

Re: acpithinkpad problems on thinkpad w500

> Just a thought... on motorized cd/dvd drives you can use cdio > > # cdio close Nope ... returns the following error: cd0(ahci0:1:0): Check Condition (error 0x70) on opcode 0x1b SENSE KEY: Illegal Request Didier

Re: arp MiTM

>From a quick glance over the patch, it seems pretty useless unless you also prevent MAC spoofing. You may want to look into port security for your switches or 802.1x if this is a big concern to you. Cheers, Paul 'WEiRD' de Weerd On Mon, Mar 09, 2009 at 02:11:38PM +0200, irix wrote: | Hello Misc

Re: pf does not log all block

Without the "quick" keyword, pf evaluates all of your rules and if a more-permissive rule exists to match the traffic flow, it is used. This is different than some commercial firewalls such as Check Point which stop when the traffic matches a rule, and the rules are processed in order. It's co

arp MiTM

Hello Misc, How to protect your server from such attacks without the use of static arp entries? By freebsd 5.0 patch was written arp_antidote (http://freecap.ru/if_ether.c.patch), somebody could port it on openbsd? Also, in freebsd it is possible to specify a flag through the ifconfig on the

Re: Bug OpenBGPD, IPv6 peer gets cleared, never gets up again

We commented out the following lines, to test if it is indeed an End-of-RIB-marker that is acting up, and it turns out it isn't. in rde.c line 2613 we commented out this: if (peer->capa_received.restart && peer->capa_announced.restart) peer_send_eor(peer, afi, safi); This is the only pl

Re: acpithinkpad problems on thinkpad w500

On Mon, 09 Mar 2009 08:23:04 + Didier Wiroth wrote: > Hello, > Thanks for replying. > > It is now the exact same behaviour as mentioned in the bug report and > email "pending/6099" from Aaron W.Hsu. > > The message starts when opening the cd. Disabling acpithinkpad stops > the message flood

Nuevas ofertas de Mercadonica.com

Si no puede ver bien el contenido de este boletmn, hacer clic AQUI Publicar anuncio www.mercadonica.com Anuncios promocionados Casas/Oficinas Alquilo Oficina PA : 150 Managua Ver mas Vendo Casa PV : 40,000 Managua Ver mas Vendo Casa PV : 50,000 Managua Ver mas Terrenos/Propiedades Vendo

x11 problems with lenovo w500

Hello, I have a strange problem which I never had in the past when using a lenovo laptop with a somewhat identical configuration. I'm using CURRENT with a lenovo w500 (model 4063-34G). This model has one of these switchable dual graphics. (ATI Mobility Radeon FireGL V5700 + Intel's integrated GMA

Re: pppoe server

On 08.03-11:13, Lo?=?VAI DC!niel wrote: [ ... ] > I wish to experiment setting up a PPPoE server (AC) on OpenBSD 4.4. > Although I've read the pppoe(8) man page and googled around, it is not > clear for me how to set up such configuration. man sppp

Re: PF Seems To Reload Its Default Rules Unexpectedly

On Sun, 8 Mar 2009 16:01:57 -0700 Hilco Wijbenga wrote: > I have pf running on my firewall box and I'm experiencing some strange > behaviour. After several hours (this may even be 24 hours) of > functioning normally, pf seems to reload its default rules which means > that from that point on all t

Re: PF firewall system capable of handling a multi-gigabit link

2009/3/9 Ted Unangst > On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 2:14 PM, Alface Voadora > wrote: > > Do you know about any installed firewall cluster that has pf+carp+pfsync > > working along with ALTQ on a multi-gigabit configuration with an > acceptable > > performance? > > how many gigabits is multi-gigabit?

Re: acpithinkpad problems on thinkpad w500

Hello, Thanks for replying. It is now the exact same behaviour as mentioned in the bug report and email "pending/6099" from Aaron W.Hsu. The message starts when opening the cd. Disabling acpithinkpad stops the message flood but it is still impossible to close the cd. Kind regards, Didier > --