On Sun, Jul 24 2011 at 27:21, David Gwynne wrote:
> On 24/07/2011, at 8:27 PM, Jonathan Lassoff wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 7:10 AM, David Gwynne wrote:
> >>
> >> On 20/04/2011, at 11:08 PM, Jonathan Lassoff wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 4:22 AM, David Gwynne wrote:
> y
On 24/07/2011, at 8:27 PM, Jonathan Lassoff wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 7:10 AM, David Gwynne wrote:
>>
>> On 20/04/2011, at 11:08 PM, Jonathan Lassoff wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 4:22 AM, David Gwynne wrote:
you might be able to upgrade your passive firewall to 4.9 next to t
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 7:10 AM, David Gwynne wrote:
>
> On 20/04/2011, at 11:08 PM, Jonathan Lassoff wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 4:22 AM, David Gwynne wrote:
>>> you might be able to upgrade your passive firewall to 4.9 next to the
>>> active 4.7 one. it looks like the protocol stayed t
On 20/04/2011, at 11:08 PM, Jonathan Lassoff wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 4:22 AM, David Gwynne wrote:
>> you might be able to upgrade your passive firewall to 4.9 next to the
active 4.7 one. it looks like the protocol stayed the same so they should be
able to talk to each other.
>
> This wou
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 4:22 AM, David Gwynne wrote:
> you might be able to upgrade your passive firewall to 4.9 next to the active
> 4.7 one. it looks like the protocol stayed the same so they should be able to
> talk to each other.
This would seem to be the case.
This (http://undeadly.org/cg
you might be able to upgrade your passive firewall to 4.9 next to the active
4.7 one. it looks like the protocol stayed the same so they should be able to
talk to each other.
however, it looks like bulk updates were broken in 4.7, which would explain
your failover problems. you can work around tha
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 7:14 PM, David Gwynne wrote:
> i had this same problem and fixed it in time for the 4.8 release. is it
> possible you can upgrade?
Do you mean that this was an issue in 4.7 that was fixed in 4.8?
I most definitely plan to upgrade (all the way to 4.9, most likely),
but am
i had this same problem and fixed it in time for the 4.8 release. is it
possible you can upgrade?
On 20/04/2011, at 9:10 AM, Jonathan Lassoff wrote:
> I'm having a bit of an issue with OpenOSPFd on 4.7 running on i386
hardware.
>
> The gist of the problem is that it seems that changes to the kern
I'm having a bit of an issue with OpenOSPFd on 4.7 running on i386 hardware.
The gist of the problem is that it seems that changes to the kernel
routing table and/or interfaces are not being synchronized into the
OSPF RIB and LSDB.
As an example, I have a CARP interface called "carp17" that is
co
9 matches
Mail list logo
