Hi,
On Wed, 26 Feb 2014 16:32:34 -0800
"Paul B. Henson" wrote:
> I currently have the following in pf.conf:
>
> -
> pass quick proto { esp, ah } from any to any
> pass in quick on em1 proto udp from any to 96.251.22.154 port {500, 4500,
> 1701} keep state
> set skip on enc0
> set skip on ppp
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 11:00 AM, Stuart Henderson wrote:
>
> Try tcpdumping packets going over the ipsec tunnel, do you see those packets
> which should be local actually being sent over the tunnel? If so, I don't have
> an answer for this, but I've seen it myself, though only with manually
> con
On 27/02/2014, at 11:04 AM, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> I believe you are posting cast aspersions on the pf efforts.
Theo,
I'll insist then that I think pf is a superior piece of code
which I benefit from every day, and that Henning's efforts
to simplify it are so very welcome in a world addicted to
On 2014-02-26, Josh wrote:
> Hi @misc,
>
> I am facing an issue between two boxes (box1 and box2) connected
> through an IPsec tunnel.
> They are both on the same subnet and both listen on port 22 (sshd running)
>
> When the ipsec tunnel is down and encap routes are flushed on both
> boxes (ipsecc
I'm trying to get a L2TP VPN working using npppd; I think I'm most of the
way there but packets just aren't quite flowing. I'm not sure why, but I
think I might be missing something or misunderstanding something with pf.
I've got ipsec=YES and isakmpd_flags="-K" in rc.conf.local, and
/etc/ipsec.c
> Again, it's not just me saying it: "...checksums are used by
> higher layers to ensure that data was not corrupted in
> intermediate routers or by the sending or receiving host.
> The fact that checksums are typically the secondary level of
> protection has often led to suggestions that checksums
> On 24/02/2014, at 9:33 PM, Henning Brauer wrote:
>
> > * Richard Procter [2014-01-25 20:41]:
> >> On 22/01/2014, at 7:19 PM, Henning Brauer wrote:
> >>> * Richard Procter [2014-01-22 06:44]:
> This fundamentally weakens its usefulness, though: a correct
> checksum now implies only th
On 24/02/2014, at 9:33 PM, Henning Brauer wrote:
> * Richard Procter [2014-01-25 20:41]:
>> On 22/01/2014, at 7:19 PM, Henning Brauer wrote:
>>> * Richard Procter [2014-01-22 06:44]:
This fundamentally weakens its usefulness, though: a correct
checksum now implies only that the payload
On Feb 26, 2014, at 1:15 PM, Claus Assmann wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 26, 2014, Aaron Poffenberger wrote:
>
>> I tried that. If you telnet into smtpd to manually send an email and set
>> "rcpt to: " you will receive a "553 Recipient address syntax
>
> That's invalid even if you gave a proper address.
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014, Aaron Poffenberger wrote:
> I tried that. If you telnet into smtpd to manually send an email and set
> "rcpt to: " you will receive a "553 Recipient address syntax
That's invalid even if you gave a proper address.
RFC 5321:
RCPT TO: [ SP ]
...
Since it has been
On Feb 26, 2014, at 11:51 AM, Ted Unangst wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 11:30, Aaron Poffenberger wrote:
>> When amavisd re-injected the email it was rejected by smtpd because "To:
>> " is an invalid recipient. The solution, then, was to defer the
>> "virtual > use "relay via":
>
>> # public
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 11:30, Aaron Poffenberger wrote:
> When amavisd re-injected the email it was rejected by smtpd because "To:
> " is an invalid recipient. The solution, then, was to defer the
> "virtual use "relay via":
> # public emails before content filtering
> accept tagged default from
I recently configured smptd to replace a postfix-based solution.
smtpd(8) is a joy to work with. In ~four rules I had a working email
server!
My next goals was to get content filtering in place. I decided on
amavisd-new with clamav and spamassassin.
I couldn't find any tutorials for using amavisd
Hi @misc,
I am facing an issue between two boxes (box1 and box2) connected
through an IPsec tunnel.
They are both on the same subnet and both listen on port 22 (sshd running)
When the ipsec tunnel is down and encap routes are flushed on both
boxes (ipsecctl -F), performing a "telnet ip_of_box1 22
Hi Gilles,
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 11:37:47AM +0100, Gilles Chehade wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 11:16:40AM +0100, Francesco Toscan wrote:
> > Is this content filtering api documented anywhere? I found no mention in
> > smtpd.conf(5) or smtpd(8) man pages.
> >
>
> nope because we're still sta
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 11:16:40AM +0100, Francesco Toscan wrote:
> Hi,
>
Hi,
> looking at GSOC2014 OpenBSD Foundation's idea list, I found a reference
> to some "Perl and Python bindings" to smtpd's own content filtering
> framework.
>
yup, experimental but fonctional stuff, not usable by !d
Hi,
looking at GSOC2014 OpenBSD Foundation's idea list, I found a reference
to some "Perl and Python bindings" to smtpd's own content filtering
framework.
Is this content filtering api documented anywhere? I found no mention in
smtpd.conf(5) or smtpd(8) man pages.
I'd like to know whether this a
Not even when started with --posix, or with the env var POSIXLY_CORRECT.
perhaps bash needs a --really-really-posix flag... 8-/
2014-02-25 8:44 GMT+01:00 Dennis Davis :
> On Tue, 25 Feb 2014, Ingo Schwarze wrote:
>
> > From: Ingo Schwarze
> > To: Fabian Raetz
> > Cc: misc@openbsd.org
> > Date
18 matches
Mail list logo
