> This interface is not UP. Not sure why.
Thank you! This was indeed the cause. I appended "up" to
/etc/hostname.vport0 and everything works now.
Most interfaces get turned on automatically, I wonder why vport(4) does
not.
In any case, it's solved, thanks so much.
--
jrmu
IRCNow (https://ircno
On Mon, Jun 03, 2024 at 10:52:55PM -0700, jrmu wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> I am having a hard time figuring out how to bridge vport(4) and tap(4)
> interfaces.
>
> Previously, I had set up vmm with bridge(4) and vether(4), and all was
> working well. However, I recently heard that veb(4) has better
On 04/06/2024 08:50, jrmu wrote:
>> When you manage a hypervisor, using only 1x/64 is less than ideal. It's just
>> not enough because you can have more than 1 'type of usage'. I always
>> request at least 1x/56.
> Thanks. I spoke with the ISP and he gave me a larger subnet,
>
> 2602:fccf:4::/48, I
> > I want to upgrade an amd64 system running 6.9.
Backup, reinstall current from scratch,
restore from backup.
> > wget https://cdn.openbsd.org/pub/OpenBSD/7.{0,1,2}/amd64/bsd.rd
> > returns 404 for all three queries.
> > Where can I find the bsd.rd images for these versions?
For example
https:
Greetings,
I am having a hard time figuring out how to bridge vport(4) and tap(4)
interfaces.
Previously, I had set up vmm with bridge(4) and vether(4), and all was
working well. However, I recently heard that veb(4) has better
performance, so I tried to replace my bridge0 and vether0 with veb0
> When you manage a hypervisor, using only 1x/64 is less than ideal. It's just
> not enough because you can have more than 1 'type of usage'. I always
> request at least 1x/56.
Thanks. I spoke with the ISP and he gave me a larger subnet,
2602:fccf:4::/48, I've been experimenting it by manually ad
Hi all,
I am trying to run Debian 12 under VMM.
I can see on the email from 2024-04-02 that Bruce managed to make it work, but
I don't know how.
The crux of the issue is that the Debian ISO installer does not seem to work
under serial console.
Here's what I did:
/etc/vm.conf
vm "vm1" {
On Fri, May 31, 2024 at 11:02:57AM +0200, Quentin Carbonneaux wrote:
Hi,
I want to upgrade an amd64 system running 6.9.
I do not know your setup, but upgrading from 6.9 to 7.5 may
be an issue. Somewhere along the line I believe the default
partition sizes changed. That means one of the upgra
Hi,
I've bought a new NVMe drive (Goodram PX700) and its both vendor and product
IDs are missing in pcidevs.
nvme0 at pci2 dev 0 function 0 unknown vendor 0x1e4b product 0x1602 rev 0x01:
msix, NVMe 2.0
nvme0: SSDPR-PX700-02T-80, firmware SN15299, serial G3F013435
The missing IDs (0x1e4b and 0x
On 2024-06-03, 04-psyche.tot...@icloud.com <04-psyche.tot...@icloud.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Is there any downside is using the nopass option of doas, for a single user
> machine?
>
> It's a machine that I access to only via ssh, with an identity file.
>
> In what way would it increase the attack
Hi all,
Is there any downside is using the nopass option of doas, for a single user
machine?
It's a machine that I access to only via ssh, with an identity file.
In what way would it increase the attack surface to do so?
Thanks,
Jake
11 matches
Mail list logo
