Hello,
I've been playing with relayd lately. There is a behavior which seems
unintuitive and I was wondering if that was a bug or the intended
behavior.
When I try to disable a host (e.g.: relayctl host disable 10.0.1.101),
and that host is part of more than one table, only the first occurence
ge
On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 11:05:40AM +0100, Dan Carley wrote:
>
> We've been playing with relayd recently - both from 4.5 and the latest
> snapshot.
>
> Approximately every hour we are seeing one or two state changes logged. But
> I can't see reason for the change of state and there doesn't appear
Hello,
recently we upgraded some of our firewalls from OpenBSD 4.4 to 4.5.
Since then, we've been getting loads of the following message
(external addresses substitued with AAA's and BBB's):
Jun 11 18:08:19 celeborn /bsd: pf: state key linking mismatch! dir=OUT,
if=bge0, stored af=2, a0: 10.136.1
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 05:56:43AM +0200, Henning Brauer wrote:
> * Pascal Lalonde [2009-06-12 00:28]:
> > Jun 11 18:08:19 celeborn /bsd: pf: state key linking mismatch! dir=OUT,
> > if=bge0, stored af=2, a0: 10.136.192.199:30285, a1: 10.216.8.1:22,
> > proto=6, found af=2
Hello,
I was wondering about how to achieve some kind of weighted round-robin
with OpenBSD...
So far, we can achieve some limited weighted round-robin by using rdr's
with lists, and repeating the stronger nodes in the list.
(Is there a limit to the number of nodes in a list??)
This is what we us
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 05:56:43AM +0200, Henning Brauer wrote:
> * Pascal Lalonde [2009-06-12 00:28]:
> > Jun 11 18:08:19 celeborn /bsd: pf: state key linking mismatch! dir=OUT,
> > if=bge0, stored af=2, a0: 10.136.192.199:30285, a1: 10.216.8.1:22,
> > proto=6, found af=2
I just happened to run into the same issue right after upgrading to 4.7
(however, you mention 4.6, so I'm uncertain we're dealing with the same
cause).
Basically, the issue I'm seeing is that portmap/rpc.bootparamd don't see
the incoming packets for 172.16.255.255 (my own network being
172.16.5.0/
I just caught the following from openbsd-cvs:
http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-cvs&m=126326657232193&w=2
If my understanding is correct, this means that it will become
impossible to emulate weighted round robin with constructs like the one
below, since duplicate IPs will be "flattened" once converted
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 01:58:30PM +0900, Ryan McBride wrote:
>
> My first thought is to wonder why you're not running with a symmetrical
> cluster. But I realise that we are not always in control of such things,
> and one of PFs functions is to get help people work around bad network
> design.
R
Hello,
we have a problem with ifstated detecting state change on multiple CARP
interfaces.
After digging deeper, it seems that reading on the routing socket does
not give us all the state changes that we'd expect. We tried with the
latest snapshot kernel and got the same behavior.
Our CARP inter
On Tue, Aug 04, 2009 at 01:20:17AM +, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> I don't understand what you mean by "VLAN on carp1", can you explain it
> a bit more please?
My bad. I confused things a little.
It's as you say, carpdevs set to vlan interfaces. In this case, carp1010
and carp1011 have vlan1010
On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 08:06:36AM +0200, Laurent CARON wrote:
> On 28/09/2009 04:28, Steven Surdock wrote:
>> ...
>> HERE IS IFSTATED DETECTING THE FAILOVER, WHICH SHOULD HAVE HAPPENED ON
>> SEP 25, BUT DIDN'T
>> Sep 26 14:19:03 fw2 ifstated[16189]: changing state to normal
>> Sep 26 14:19:03 fw2
12 matches
Mail list logo
