Am Donnerstag, 29. November 2012 schrieb lilit-aibolit :
>
> Good. I have two configs. And in specified time I need to *reload* to new
> config-file,
> not reload same config-file.
> How 'relayctl reload' help me?
>
You should read the relayctl(8) manpage first.
relayctl load filename
Reyk
this is a fresh install! I couldn't find a CD image for current or did I
miss something?
The machine is right now somehow 'isolated' and doesn't have any floppy or
serial console attached :(
I don't know if its a way to capture the dmesg other than the ones
described in:
http://openbsd.org/faq/f
On 29/11/2012 08:01, James Shupe wrote:
I ran across this today after AboveNET upgraded some routers (I would
have appreciated a maintenance notice...)
I applied Claudio's patch and the sessions came back up and have been
stable for the last half hour. I'll check back in if there are any issues.
2012/11/29 Tony Berth :
> s a fresh install! I couldn't find a CD image for current or did I
> miss something?
Try latest snapshot, e.g.
http://ftp.icm.edu.pl/pub/OpenBSD/snapshots/i386/ (or amd64, you
didn't specify)
--
Michał Markowski
I get some strange results concerning scp-transferrates depending on
the hosts that are involved.
Testfile is a zip-compressed file of 16 MB. All hosts run OpenBSD with
MP-kernel and 4 CPUs, but with different versions between 4.8 and 5.2.
All interfaces run with disabled inet6. ping with large pa
Thanks
Both i386 and amd64 fail! But, are that many differences between stable and
current?
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 11:20 AM, MichaÅ Markowski
wrote:
> 2012/11/29 Tony Berth :
> > s a fresh install! I couldn't find a CD image for current or did I
> > miss something?
>
> Try latest snapshot, e
On 11/29/12 06:42, Tony Berth wrote:
> Thanks
>
> Both i386 and amd64 fail! But, are that many differences between stable and
> current?
You caught us, nothing has changed in OpenBSD since 1995, we just drink
beer and increment the version number every six months.
The most significant changes t
* Stuart Henderson (s...@spacehopper.org) wrote:
> On 2012-11-28, Chris Smith wrote:
> > Also wonder why anyone in their right mind would use FTPS!?
>
> Because they can just hack it on top of their crusty old ftp server
> software, whereas using sftp would need much bigger changes?
>
Im working
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 12:48 PM, Chris Smith wrote:
> Looks like skipping ftp-proxy for that target address works. Thanks!
Is there any way to make this work automagically for ftps?
Right now I'm doing this:
anchor "ftp-proxy/*"
pass in quick on $int_if inet proto tc
>Because they can just hack it on top of their crusty old ftp server
>software, whereas using sftp would need much bigger changes?
SSL/TLS makes everything more secure
> >Because they can just hack it on top of their crusty old ftp server
> >software, whereas using sftp would need much bigger changes?
>
> SSL/TLS makes everything more secure
Never more so than when HSTS is enabled and you can't access paypal
because your clock is wrong due to a dead bios
Have you tried stacking a crypto volume on top of the softraid raid1 volume ?
zgeggy2k [zgegg...@yahoo.com] wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm using 5.2 and trying to use 2 mirrored disks as RAID1, but also encrypt
> them.
> I can use softraid to either raid1 _OR_ encrypt, but not both.
>
> I've RTFM'd and UT
Yes, I tried stacking them one after the other (first raiding, then
crypto'ing) - didn't work.
-- Greg
--
View this message in context:
http://openbsd.7691.n7.nabble.com/softraid-to-encrypt-AND-raid-tp219721p219770.html
Sent from the openbsd user - misc mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
13 matches
Mail list logo
