Matthew Dempsky schrieb:
Is there any interest in replacing
sendmail with it to remove another component from the src/gnu/
hierarchy?
No.
In ports yes, in base no.
I don't see any advantage switching from sendmail to qmail.
...and yes, i know qmail. It was the first mailserver i get in touch
Lars Hansson wrote:
> And for the majority of the worlds population that doesn't speak German
> this says exactly what?
http://www.heise-security.co.uk/news/86757
Maverick wrote:
> Hi i am trying to apply the 001 patch
> What i have done is
>
> cd /usr/src
> patch -p0 < 001_httpd.patch
>
> and i come back to me as:
[SNIP]
It's the same procedure on 4.0 as it was on 3.9 and it will still
be in 4.1.
You ask the the same question on 11/29/06 in "A
Ikmal Ahmad schrieb:
> Hi all,
>
> Based on http://www.openbsd.org.my/sparc64.html, seem that OpenBSD can
> install on Sun Blade 100/150 machine. I have this problem when do
> disk installation on Blade 100. Below is the error.
>
> ok boot disk /bsd
> Boot device: /[EMAIL PROTECTED],0/[EMAIL PR
Tonnerre LOMBARD schrieb:
> Salut,
>
> I have a problem with direct connection of two servers using IPsec. The
> IKE key exchange always comes up, but then it seems that both the routing
> and the encryption go entirely wrong.
>
> The host exchange their internal addresses (10.16.1.1 and 10.1.1.1
Tonnerre LOMBARD wrote:
>> You must have the 10.1.1.1 as source ip. A normal ping on the gateway
>> ueses the external ip as source!
>
> Yes, this one works so far. However, how would one configure this
> statically? Is there any way other than route add -host 10.1.1.1 10.16.1.1 ?
I know no way
d.conf/isakmpd.policy.
In your case, maybe a:
ike esp from to
ike esp from 10.16.0.0/16 to 10.1.0.0/16 peer
in the first gatways ipsec.conf and a corresponding configuration on the
second gatway will do the work.
Ralph
--
--- Ralph Gessner --
7 matches
Mail list logo
