On Tue, Apr 01, 2025 at 09:17:03AM -0400, Sven F. wrote:
> April fools ?
entirely possible
As could be of course the thing that triggered
https://mastodon.social/@pitrh/114262855940544666
(but less likely I think)
--
Peter N. M. Hansteen, member of the first RFC 1149 implementation team
https
I have a/24 from ARDC 44 net. I put that/24 into a different rdomain, makes it
easier for me to move it off to a different router in the future. I have ipsec
tunnels from various amateur radio remote stations which terminate in the
rdomain, this system is used as a hub for these sites.
diana
Jonathan Gray schreef op 2025-04-03 12:10:
On Wed, Apr 02, 2025 at 05:18:48PM +0200, Emiel Kollof wrote:
Hi,
Is there any reason why the amdgpu firmware/driver won't work with
resize
BAR enabled? When I enable ReBAR I get:
I think it came down to having to change the pci code and perhaps
re
Reading hostname.if(5) and ifconfig(8) again, I understand that commands in
hostname.if are executed by ifconfig. Of interest here is the ifconfig command
"group"; hostname.if(8) does not say a word about this command, but it should
work. Of special interest here is the group "egress". hostname.
On Mon, Mar 31, 2025 at 05:58:18PM +, otto.cooper wrote:
>
> On Monday, March 31st, 2025 at 5:21 PM, Zé Loff wrote:
>
> > Any particular reason for having two different interfaces on the same
> > subnet, with the same priority? Can you communicate with machines
> > connected to the LAN switc
On 26/03/25 21:43, Steve Williams wrote:
> I am not simulating a short outage. I left the UPS unplugged for 20
> minutes. It should have easily picked up that transition. I could
> see that the state had changed in sysctl.
>
> Still wondering...
For what it's worth, my configuration is very si
> You'll also have to tell all the machines in the LAN that their new
> gateway is at 192.168.1.6 (or whatever is the address of the firewall's
> internal interface). Otherwise they'll still be trying to reach
> 192.168.1.1 and won't be able to do so.
> Also, note that if the hosts in the LAN are
> > # External interface
> > ext_if = "em0"
>
> Maybe:
> # External interface
> $ext_if = "em0"
Nopes
--
May the most significant bit of your life be positive.
Since hostname.if executes ifconfig commands, I thought that using the command
"priority" would solve this case study, as some of you suggested. No, it does
not.
```
priority n
Set the interface routing priority to n. n is in the
range of 0 to 15 with smaller numbers being better. The
default
> The easy solution then would be to stick
>
> 192.168.1.1
>
> in /etc/mygate, then run doas sh /etc/netstart or equivalent
Done. No joy.
This is a firewall, I need egress to be on the right interface.
On Sun, Mar 23, 2025 at 08:14:56AM -0700, Steve Williams wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am trying to get apcupsd working on my OpenBSD 7.6 box.
>
> Using the standard drivers (upd0 at uhidev0), sysctl hw.sensors is returning
> data. (Full dmesg to follow)
>
>
> mini# sysctl hw.sensors
> hw.sensors.cpu
As per subject:
TLS Error for https://www.openbsdfoundation.org
Dan
--
Blog: http://bsd.gaoxio.com - Repo: https://code.5mode.com
Please reply to the mailing-list, leveraging technical stuff.
Hi Jon,
Thanks for that additional information updated. However doesnt solve the
problem.
What works is to inform pf a bit more by updating the pf.conf file with the
following lines:
pass in on em0 from 41.90.23.0/24 to 41.90.23.240
pass out on em0 from 41.90.23.240 to 41.90.23.0/24
However loo
On 2025-03-19, Jan Stary wrote:
> But there might still be copies of the superblock on the (rest of) the FFS.
> Have you tried scan_ffs(8)?
openbsd's scan_ffs still doesn't support FFSv2 so this won't work on any recent
install
--
Please keep replies on the mailing list.
Hello,
Using parentheses around the interface (from 41.90.23.240 to *($ext_if)* port
ssh modulate state) name tells pf to re-resolve the address dynamically
whenever the interface is ready during the reboot giving time for pf rules
to load successfully.
Regards,
Kihaguru
On Thu, 20 Mar 2025, 13
On Monday, March 31st, 2025 at 6:09 PM, Zé Loff wrote:
> Per this configuration, both interfaces are on 192.168.1.0/24: one is
> .11, the other is .12.
> Since routing seems to work properly, I am assuming this was a copy/paste
> error.
No copy/paste error. Perhaps a real error on my side.
To be fair, I should have checked this in src for current and not 7.6.
I've been doing a bit of testing over the weekend and forgot to switch
back to current. hw.perfpolicy=auto works great now, cpu temp runs
around 7-12C cooler for my setup while on AC. Enough to keep the fan
at 0 RPM most of the
I did read the man pages.
You, on the other hand, you did not read my text, where I wrote about the man
page.
Sent with Proton Mail secure email.
On Monday, March 24th, 2025 at 4:45 PM, Jan Stary wrote:
> On Mar 24 14:40:47, otto.coo...@proton.me wrote:
>
> > Suppose you want to change the
> Original Message
> On 4/3/25 08:18, Janne Johansson wrote:
>
> > The default route is given by an ip, then the kernel looks up which
> > interface contains the network for which the box can reach this ip in a
> > single hop. If it can, the route is now shown to be over this
Hi,
Your use case is an outlier. Having both interfaces on the same network
is not a standard configuration.
Just quit using the magic word "egress" in your pf.conf and use the
specific interface names.
I went years (I started using OpenBSD 2.6) before I discovered the
"egress" magic word
Thank you for your reply Dan. See inline comments.
On Sun, Mar 30, 2025 at 04:27:34PM +0200, Dan wrote:
> I tend to not understand much expecially when you mix up stuff to fix
> with "Windows 10", sorry for that.
>
The above comment was included in case a newly found Windows10 issue
w.r.t. dual
Original Message
On 4/3/25 08:52, otto.cooper wrote:
> Original Message
> On 4/3/25 08:18, Janne Johansson wrote:
>
> > The default route is given by an ip, then the kernel looks up which
> interface contains the network for which the box can reach t
Quincy Lawd wrote:
> I've never had any issue like this before. I even unplugged everything
> and put them back in, and still it's not POSTing
FWIW I have, but under Linux, so it's not unheard of. The Ubuntu installer
(if we are naming and shaming) ran a friendly 'firmware update' at its
conclusi
On 4/2/25 16:11, Quincy Lawd wrote:
Greetings,
I have a fairly old motherboard,
^^ <- there's first clue.
...
Now only today, I had a mediatek wifi card laying around and ran
fw_update and it fetched something like "intel-drm" drivers and mtw
and downloaded them
24 matches
Mail list logo
