On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 7:31 PM, Jonathan Gray wrote:
> http://meetings.ripe.net/ripe-52/presentations/ripe52-plenary-dnsamp.pdf
>
Thankyou so much :-)
Siju
May 19: Happy Birthday, Theo!
*** NOTE *** Please DO NOT CC me. I subscribed to the list.
Mail to the sender address that does not originate at the list server is
tarpitted. The reply-to: address is provided for those who feel compelled to
reply off list. Thankyou.
Rod/
---
This life is not the
hi
still looking for an answer to the following question
hi all
have configured two firewalls with carp
i have connectivity to the internet and the firewalls failover properly.
when i check the carp states of each firewall the slave reports that its
wan connection is in the master state the same
> cp: /mnt/oldhome/xxx/Virtualisation/QEmu/FreeBSD/doc/doc.gd:
> Bad file descriptor
Why are you usign cp? Why don't you "dump | restore"?
Hi all,
I am trying to install the APC extension for PHP on my OBSD server.
Steps taken: pkg_add pecl-APC-3.1.7p0.tgz which works fine
When I use pkg_info to check, it tells me to create a symbolic link
from /etc/php-${PV}.sample/${MODULE_NAME}.ini to
/etc/php-${PV}/${MODULE_NAME}.ini however, the
FESTIVAL LE CHIEN A PLUMES /// 2.3.4.5 AOUT 2012
LANGRES - Lac de Villegusien - 52
QUOI DE NEUF ?? Au chien ` plumes ...
_
___
GROUNDATION REJOINT LA PROGRAMMATION DU JEUDI 2 AOUT !!
Les californien
Le 2012-05-17 22:41, Mihai Popescu a C)critB :
Hi,
Daniel, maybe you should pass over natural instinct of being
associated with a good thing and change the domain name and the
layout
of the site. As it is now, it will look like OpenBSD mantained site
for a beginner.
Just a tought, nothing pers
Hi,
Daniel, maybe you should pass over natural instinct of being
associated with a good thing and change the domain name and the layout
of the site. As it is now, it will look like OpenBSD mantained site
for a beginner.
Just a tought, nothing personal.
Hi Chris,
Chris Cappuccio wrote on Thu, May 03, 2012 at 09:31:55PM -0700:
> Mike Erdely [m...@erdelynet.com] wrote:
>> FYI: For a test, I added "foo" with useradd(8) and "bar" with adduser(8):
>> # grep -E "(foo|bar)" /etc/master.passwd
>> foo:*:1002:1002::0:0::/home/foo:/bin/ksh
>> b
I am putting up OpenBSD 5.1 for the first time and I am getting
May 17 11:36:59 mail named[6539]: starting BIND 9.4.2-P2
May 17 11:37:00 mail named[6539]: command channel listening on 127.0.0.1#953
May 17 11:37:00 mail named[6539]: running
May 17 11:37:00 mail named[6539]:
/usr/src/usr.sbin/bind/l
http://meetings.ripe.net/ripe-52/presentations/ripe52-plenary-dnsamp.pdf
Didn't take into account that you do not publish the DNS. That fact
makes my assumption wrong.
Really, go and log the requests! =)
17.05.2012 15:50, Siju George P=P0P?P8QP0P;:
> This traffic is blocked on the external interface of the firewall.
--
Best regards,
Pavel Shvagirev
skype: pavel.shva
>I wonder if these machines in the facebook.com domain are infected
>with some malware bots?
Facebook *is* a malware bot:)
Let the request through and log what it tries to do next, this could be quite a
story.
-- p
Most likely that someone posted a link to a resource in your domain, and
your DNS appears to be an authoritative for that zone. Sounds quite
realistic. There on facebook might be some kind of parser trying to
retreive a preview for the link or something similar...
Anyway, have a look at the DNS se
ager39...@mypacks.net writes:
> What rules should I have in "pf.conf" for both greylisting and
> blacklisting? I'd like to blacklist those site that got spam through
> the greylisting.
Unless you explicitly start spamd in blacklisting-only mode, it will
greylist.
The spamd related rules I have
Hi,
This traffic is blocked on the external interface of the firewall.
May 17 11:34:56.013614 rule 7/(match) block in on em1:
66.220.151.124.47369 > xxx.yyy.ddd.zzz.53: 58106 NS? . (19)
May 17 11:34:56.763086 rule 7/(match) block in on em1:
66.220.151.124.47369 > xxx.yyy.ddd.zzz.53: 58107 NS? . (
On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 03:19:07AM -0700, Garry Dolley wrote:
> On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 09:13:30AM -0400, Simon Perreault wrote:
> > On 2012-05-11 04:15, Garry Dolley wrote:
> >> I now have an amd64 test VM set up, where I installed stock 5.0.
> >>
> >> I ran a lot of traffic over em0 without any t
> No, your script or ifstated config will need to adjust this rule,
> you can do this by using a macro to write the rule, something like this:
>
> GATEWAYS="1.1.1.1@em0 2.2.2.2@em1"
> pass in on $int_if from $lan_net route-to { $GATEWAYS }
>
> This helps because you can override the macro on the pf
> why you not try the relayd way ?
>> look at
>> http://gouloum.fr/doc/multilink.html
>>
>> the part with relayd
>>
>
>
>
>
I found that URL yesterday, I will have to learn it. I just try to
do it with a shell script.
>anyway, Thanks a lot.
>
>
>
--
Thank you
Indunil Jayasooriya
On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 09:13:30AM -0400, Simon Perreault wrote:
> On 2012-05-11 04:15, Garry Dolley wrote:
>> I now have an amd64 test VM set up, where I installed stock 5.0.
>>
>> I ran a lot of traffic over em0 without any timeouts.
>
> That's expected. 5.0 has been running without issue for me
> why you not try the relayd way ?
> look at
> http://gouloum.fr/doc/multilink.html
>
> the part with relayd
>
> holger
>
> > On 2012/05/17 13:20, Indunil Jayasooriya wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> Route lookups are based on the *destination* address not the source
> >> address, you could add
hi
why you not try the relayd way ?
look at
http://gouloum.fr/doc/multilink.html
the part with relayd
holger
> On 2012/05/17 13:20, Indunil Jayasooriya wrote:
>>
>>
>> Route lookups are based on the *destination* address not the source
>> address, you could add a route for a certain des
Thank you very much for explanations.
It works very good.
Thank you,
Bogdan
From: Stuart Henderson
To: misc@openbsd.org
Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2012 6:08 PM
Subject: Re:
trunk0 with dual stack
On 2012-05-16, Bogdan Andu wrote:
>
It is possible to build an
On 2012/05/17 13:20, Indunil Jayasooriya wrote:
>
>
> Route lookups are based on the *destination* address not the source
> address, you could add a route for a certain destination via a
> certain interface to send packets out that way.
>
>
> Hmm. that sounds good to me. Since I have 2
On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 09:13:30AM -0400, Simon Perreault wrote:
> On 2012-05-11 04:15, Garry Dolley wrote:
>> I now have an amd64 test VM set up, where I installed stock 5.0.
>>
>> I ran a lot of traffic over em0 without any timeouts.
>
> That's expected. 5.0 has been running without issue for me
> Route lookups are based on the *destination* address not the source
> address, you could add a route for a certain destination via a
> certain interface to send packets out that way.
>
> Hmm. that sounds good to me. Since I have 2 interfaces for 2 different WAN
connections. It is possible to add
Hi Misc@,
I noticed that this ICMP traffic always gets a bad checksum leaving the
router.
sample:
on routerA(accessRouter)
$ ping 203.190.abc.xyz
PING 203.190.abc.xyz: 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 203.190.abc.xyz: icmp_seq=0 ttl=58 time=6.215 ms
64 bytes from 203.190.
27 matches
Mail list logo
