Hi,
The maximum payload in ping.c (all source has been run through cat -n) is:
92 #define MAXPAYLOAD (IP_MAXPACKET - MAXIPLEN - 8) /* max
ICMP payload size */
which consists of:
90 #define MAXIPLEN60
This is the maximum IP len since the value is leftshifted by 2 and
cons
I do not think that this is completely accurate.
Sometimes people will not listen, but sometimes they will.
--
Raul
On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 5:06 PM, dsendkowski wrote:
> I really don't know why you, Theo, burn so much energy on such discussions.
It doesn't make any sense. If someone wants to co
Tue, 2 Aug 2016 09:25:17 -0700 Philip Guenther
> On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 8:12 AM, Alan Corey wrote:
> > Anybody else see this? It's happening at least 6 times a day, it's a
> > little annoying. It's happened a few times on my laptop (same 5.7
> > i386). It does happen without Firefox open but m
On Tue, Aug 2, 2016, at 22:01, Nick Holland wrote:
> On 08/02/16 01:48, Remi Locherer wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 01, 2016 at 07:10:21PM -0300, Hugo Osvaldo Barrera
> > wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I've always used password-protected ssh keys, with ssh-agent,
> >> and in
> >> recent year, I've been using f
On 08/02/16 01:48, Remi Locherer wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 01, 2016 at 07:10:21PM -0300, Hugo Osvaldo Barrera wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I've always used password-protected ssh keys, with ssh-agent, and in
>> recent year, I've been using full disk encryption as well.
>> I'm wondering if there's some redundanc
Wed, 3 Aug 2016 07:10:51 +1000 bytevolc...@safe-mail.net
> Philip Guenther wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 8:12 AM, Alan Corey wrote:
> >> Anybody else see this? It's happening at least 6 times a day, it's a
> >> little annoying. It's happened a few times on my laptop (same 5.7
> >> i386).
Philip Guenther wrote:
On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 8:12 AM, Alan Corey wrote:
Anybody else see this? It's happening at least 6 times a day, it's a
little annoying. It's happened a few times on my laptop (same 5.7
i386). It does happen without Firefox open but most of the time
that's open anyway s
I really don't know why you, Theo, burn so much energy on such discussions. It
doesn't make any sense. If someone wants to complain they will anyway. No
matter what you say they will keep complaining. It is impossible to fulfill
everybody's requirements so if someone is not satisfied than it is
On 2016-08-02, Friedrich Locke wrote:
> sioux@etosha$ ping -s 65468 gustav.cpd.ufv.br
> ping: packet size is too large: 65468
> sioux@etosha$
>
> I realize the difference between 65535 and 65467 is 68 bytes. What is obsd
> accounting for ?
Maximum IP packet size: 65535
Maximum IP header size:
On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 04:58:18PM +0200, Kamil Cholewi??ski wrote:
> On Tue, 02 Aug 2016, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> > The kernel should have a better way of exporting stations it knows about
> > live, rather than userland forcing channel hops and station changes out
> > of sync with the kernel.
>
>
On 30/07/2016 16:32, Richard Thornton wrote:
I was able to easily install OpenBSD 5.9 RELEASE amd64 to this circa 2011
Lenovo laptop with core i3, Intel Graphics, 8GB of memory, 320GB HD;
Unfortunately the Broadcom wireless will not work, but the ethernet works,
trying to understand how to add a
On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 3:13 PM, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> I see you have selected only the parts of my reply which suit you.
>
> The rest of my reply clearly stated we don't have people to do the
> work you want.
>
>> I doubt I'm the only non-developer who counts on that file to help
>> me keep from
Hi folks,
i am pinging my desktop from a obsd machine and i am very curious about the
size of packet an sending. Here you have it:
sioux@etosha$ ping -s 65467 gustav.cpd.ufv.br
PING gustav.cpd.ufv.br (200.235.177.58): 65467 data bytes
65475 bytes from 200.235.177.58: icmp_seq=0 ttl=63 time=12.241
> On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 9:42 AM, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> > Whoa. You haven't read the first paragraph of current.html, let me
> > include it here:
> >
> > Active OpenBSD development is known as the -current branch. These
> > sources are frequently compiled into releases known as
> > s
On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 9:42 AM, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> Whoa. You haven't read the first paragraph of current.html, let me
> include it here:
>
> Active OpenBSD development is known as the -current branch. These
> sources are frequently compiled into releases known as
> snapshots. Acti
Tue, 2 Aug 2016 16:35:38 +0200 Ingo Schwarze
> Hi Anton,
>
> li...@wrant.com wrote on Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 09:00:52AM +0300:
>
> > As a side note, at the moment, the home page: http://man.openbsd.org/
> > shows a link to man.cgi(8) as: http://man.openbsd.org/man.cgi.8
>
> Yes, that is intenti
On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 8:12 AM, Alan Corey wrote:
> Anybody else see this? It's happening at least 6 times a day, it's a
> little annoying. It's happened a few times on my laptop (same 5.7
> i386). It does happen without Firefox open but most of the time
> that's open anyway so I've only caught
Anybody else see this? It's happening at least 6 times a day, it's a
little annoying. It's happened a few times on my laptop (same 5.7
i386). It does happen without Firefox open but most of the time
that's open anyway so I've only caught the cursor problem without
Firefox a few times. Ctrl and
On Tue, 02 Aug 2016, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> The kernel should have a better way of exporting stations it knows about
> live, rather than userland forcing channel hops and station changes out
> of sync with the kernel.
Perhaps overloading kevent? EVFILT_IEEE80211?
On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 10:09:48AM -0400, Bryan Everly wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I'm looking for feedback before I burn time on this project so please let me
> know what you think.
>
> I'm thinking about building a daemon that I'll write in C (looked at the
> httpd code in /usr.sbin/httpd as a re
Hi Anton,
li...@wrant.com wrote on Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 09:00:52AM +0300:
> As a side note, at the moment, the home page: http://man.openbsd.org/
> shows a link to man.cgi(8) as: http://man.openbsd.org/man.cgi.8
Yes, that is intentional and supposed to work.
> This, however, does not display th
> 3. My initial thought was to do the same things in my daemon that are
> going on in the source of ifconfig.c - specifically the setifnwid(),
> setifwpakey() and setifflags() functions (as opposed to shell exec'ing
> the commands themselves). I'd prefer not to be someone who does "editor
> r
On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 10:09 AM, Bryan Everly wrote:
> Heck, I could probably write it as a shell script and just stuff it in my
> crontab.
Good plan.
Though, personally, if I were in your situation, I'd skip the crontab part.
I happen to like knowing when my network endpoint changes.
--
Raul
Hi everyone,
I'm looking for feedback before I burn time on this project so please
let me know what you think.
I'm thinking about building a daemon that I'll write in C (looked at the
httpd code in /usr.sbin/httpd as a reference) that essentially monitors
your network connectivity in the bac
> I'm one of the guys who would very much like working tmpfs. Actually, it
> has worked "good enough for me", but there are a few issues at work.
>
> - I lack the time needed to fully dive into the kernel part.
> - naddy did say multiple times it doesn't go all that fast compared to ffs
> with ssd
>I don't know why this thread got out of hand. But, as the OP I really
>had just two points. One was that, like myself, there may have been
>many others using tmpfs (due to the upbeat announcement of its
>inclusion).
This is OpenBSD. Things change.
> And that two, there was no indication of its
I don't know why this thread got out of hand. But, as the OP I really
had just two points. One was that, like myself, there may have been
many others using tmpfs (due to the upbeat announcement of its
inclusion). And that two, there was no indication of its removal in
the "following -current" faq,
Marc Espie wrote:
On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 02:53:43AM -0400, Eric Furman wrote:
...
Nope, I'm rather sure Theo doesn't care one way or the other.
I'm one of the guys who would very much like working tmpfs. Actually, it
has worked "good enough for me", but there are a few issues at work.
- I l
On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 02:53:43AM -0400, Eric Furman wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 1, 2016, at 06:41 AM, Marko Cupa?? wrote:
> > On Sun, 31 Jul 2016 21:48:46 +0300
> > Consus wrote:
> >
> > > Come on, both you and Theo are such drama queens. Shut up already.
> >
> > This. But I'd say there's more to it.
>
That is why I wanted that the openbsd related USENET groups do
not be deleted. In USENET there is more tolerance toward "stupid"
questions, toward more off-topic. USENET is there just for
dialog, not for archiving important postings. But no one was
interested here on the groups.
Rodrigo.
On Mon,
On Tue, 02 Aug 2016 02:53:43 -0400
Eric Furman wrote:
> The guy was just being a troll and Theo saw right through him.
> At the risk of sounding like a troll myself since I don't know the
> whole story behind tmpfs, I am going to guess that the tmpfs fiasco
> was not one of Theo's finest hours an
On Mon 1.Aug'16 at 7:54:57 +, C. L. Martinez wrote:
> On Fri 29.Jul'16 at 10:55:01 +0300, Kapetanakis Giannis wrote:
> > On 28/07/16 22:47, C. L. Martinez wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > I will try to encrypt all carp traffic between two OpenBSD 5.9 fws
> > > (fully patched). According to
32 matches
Mail list logo
