Ifconfig output for iwm0:
iwm0: flags=808847
mtu 1500
lladdr 44:85:00:14:a4:06
index 1 priority 4 llprio 3
groups: wlan
media: IEEE802.11 autoselect
status: no network
ieee80211: nwid sharynmikealbie wpakey wpaprotos wpa2 wpaakms psk
wpaciphers ccmp wpagroupcipher ccmp
contents of hostname.iwm0:
Hello,
On Fri, 1 Dec 2023 11:21:22 -0800
Johnathan Cobden-Nolan wrote:
> I have installed OpenBSD on hd0l: in my case it is for multi-booting,
> but I imagine there are other use cases where boot and/or root are
> installed on partitions other than 'a'.
>
> This is a UEFI system so I've installe
Hello,
7.4, rdiff-backup
After the upgrade to 7.4 I have been invited to update my
outdated command line to *the new one* by rdiff-backup.
The puzzle was not so easy to solve as "rdiff-backup --new --help"
suggested a good mix of options; "man rdiff-backup" gave out an other
set of options and
I have installed OpenBSD on hd0l: in my case it is for multi-booting,
but I imagine there are other use cases where boot and/or root are
installed on partitions other than 'a'.
This is a UEFI system so I've installed the efi bootloader which I am
able to execute. The bootloader first complains tha
This is not new.
>From time to time, manual crossover build steps occur.
We don't build them into the tree, because that turn into future burden.
Eric Grosse wrote:
> When I've built -current on several machines recently, the procedure dies at
> ===> share/termtypes
> /usr/bin/tic -C -x /us
When I've built -current on several machines recently, the procedure dies at
===> share/termtypes
/usr/bin/tic -C -x /usr/src/share/termtypes/termtypes.master > termcap
/usr/bin/tic -x -o terminfo /usr/src/share/termtypes/termtypes.master
"/usr/src/share/termtypes/termtypes.master", line 44
Hi List,
I just updated two carp/pfsync firewalls from 7.3 to 7.4. After updating the
second box I see a massive increase in traffic on the sync interface. I now
reproduced this with another pair of firewalls - same thing.
Both firewall have three physical interfaces: external, internal and syn
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 03:55:49PM +0300, 4 wrote:
>>
>> "cbq can entirely be expressed in it" ok. so how do i set priorities for
>> queues in hfsc for my local(not for a router above that knows nothing about
>> my existence. tos is an absolutely unviable concept in the real world)
>> pf-rout
On 2023/12/01 15:57, 4 wrote:
> >But CBQ doesn't help anyway, you still have this same problem.
> the problem when both from below and from above can be told to you "go and
> fuck yourself" can't be solved, but cbq gives us two mechanisms we need-
> priorities and traffic restriction. nothing mor
> On 2023-12-01, 4 wrote:
>I don't know why you are going on about SMT here.
i'm talking about not sacrificing functionality for the sake of hypothetical
performance. the slides say that using queues degrades performance by 10%. and
you're saying there won't be anything in the queues until an o
Hi,
I have a strange behavior on my relayd servers. Relayd continues checking
disabled hosts. I see it on backend server's logs.
If relayd detects a down -> up of the service it re-adds the hosts in the table
and passes traffic to the disabled hosts.
Status remains disabled.
Setup is with redi
On 01/12/2023 13:30, Kapetanakis Giannis wrote:
> I checked web csv but can't see any related change on relayd...
>
> On August and 7.3 this didn't happen.
Not relevant. I'm not on current, I run release.
G
On Fri, 1 Dec 2023 04:56:40 +0300
4 wrote:
> match proto icmp set prio(6 7) queue(6-fly 7-ack)
> how is this supposed to work at all? i.e. packets are placed both in
> prio's queues 6/7(in theory priorities and queues are the same
> thing), and in hsfc's queues 6-fly/7-ack at once?
I am not sure
On 2023-12-01, 4 wrote:
>> On 2023-11-30, 4 wrote:
>>> we can simply calculate such a basic thing as the flow rate by dividing the
>>> number of bytes in the past packets by the time. we can control the speed
>>> through delays in sending packets. this is one side of the question. as for
>>> t
> On 2023-11-30, 4 wrote:
>> we can simply calculate such a basic thing as the flow rate by dividing the
>> number of bytes in the past packets by the time. we can control the speed
>> through delays in sending packets. this is one side of the question. as for
>> the sequence, priorities work h
On 2023-11-30, 4 wrote:
> we can simply calculate such a basic thing as the flow rate by dividing the
> number of bytes in the past packets by the time. we can control the speed
> through delays in sending packets. this is one side of the question. as for
> the sequence, priorities work here. y
16 matches
Mail list logo
