[CentOS] CentOS 7.2 rootfs for i386

[kavitha bk]

Hi

I want to build a small rootfs for 32 bit CentOS to the same I plan to
build the entire OS
but I see
https://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/I_need_the_Kernel_Source
kernel_build for 32 bit is not supported . Please let me know anybody has
built the same

Thanks
Kavitha
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] [CentOS-announce] Notice of Service Outage and followup LON1/UK Facility

[Karanbir Singh]

On 02/04/16 17:07, Always Learning wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 2016-03-30 at 11:25 +0100, Karanbir Singh wrote:
> 
>> On Wednesday February 24th, at  6pm UTC time, the DC hosting some of
>> the CentOS equipments used for various roles had suffered from
>> multiple electricity power outages. The facility was completely dark
>> for just under 2 hrs, and we were able to start recovering services by
>> 8pm UTC. By midnight we had most services restored, by 2:00AM UTC Feb
>> 25th we had all services restored.
> 
> No emergency diesel generators ?  

I believe the second fail-back operation is what caused most of the
issues, this was failing back from the backup source to the mains once
they were live again.

regards


-- 
Karanbir Singh
+44-207-0999389 | http://www.karan.org/ | twitter.com/kbsingh
GnuPG Key : http://www.karan.org/publickey.asc
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[CentOS-virt] Xen custom vifname

[Peter Braun]

Hi,

Centos 7
Xen4CentOS - 4.6.1
Open vSwitch

When i specify custom name of the domU NIC than it refues to start

vif = [ 'vifname=vNIC1' ]


libxl: error: libxl_exec.c:118:libxl_report_child_exitstatus:
/etc/xen/scripts/vif-openvswitch online [10168] exited with error status 1
libxl: error: libxl_device.c:1084:device_hotplug_child_death_cb: script: ip
link set vif38.0 name vNIC1 failed
libxl: error: libxl_create.c:1381:domcreate_attach_vtpms: unable to add nic
devices
libxl: error: libxl.c:1591:libxl__destroy_domid: non-existant domain 38
libxl: error: libxl.c:1549:domain_destroy_callback: unable to destroy guest
with domid 38
libxl: error: libxl.c:1476:domain_destroy_cb: destruction of domain 38
failed


When removed the vifname settings the domU starts just fine.

vif = [ '' ]

Same error when used wi classic Bridge for networking.


Is vifname setting still supported?

On CentOS5 & Xen 3.4 this parameter works just fine.


Regards
___
CentOS-virt mailing list
CentOS-virt@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt

Re: [CentOS] How to configure DNS server in RHEL 7 / CentOS 7

[James Hogarth]

On 5 April 2016 at 20:16, Joe Smithian  wrote:

> How to configure DNS server and search domain common for all network
> interfaces not per device?
>
>
> The only reliable way I found we can set DNS name server and search domain
> in CentOS 7 is using nmcli which adds DNS name server and search domain to
> *a
> specific interface*, e.g. nmcli con mod eth0 +ipv4.dns [IP_ADDRESS]. But I
> want to set them for all interfaces weather they are configure and
> connected or not. How can we do that?
>
> More back ground information: I am using NetworkManager and nmcli tool to
> configure multiple wired Ethernet interfaces on CentOS 7. I want to set
> common DNS name server and search domain for all interfaces.
> /etc/resolv.conf is generated by NetworkManger and we cannot manually
> modify it.
>
>
>
Since the entries end up in /etc/resolv.conf they are not per interface ...

You can always set PEERDNS=no and configure /etc/resolv.conf manually or
with your CM tool of choice
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] How to set hostname and domainnmae in CentOS 7?

[James Hogarth]

On 5 April 2016 at 20:24, Joe Smithian  wrote:

> We can permanently set hostname using  hostnamectl set-hostname. How can we
> permanently set *domain name* in CentOS 7?
> I found an article
> <
> http://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/239920/how-to-set-the-fully-qualified-hostname-on-centos-7-0
> >
> that recommended setting FQDN using hostnamectl. Is that the right way to
> set hostname and domainname at the same time using *hostnamectl
> set-hostname* command?
>
>  Running *hostnamectl set-hostname* will set the hostname in*
> /etc/hostname*
> but it doesn't change */etc/hosts*. What's the proper way of adding
> hostname and FQDN to */etc/hosts *in CentOS 7?
>
>
Technically speaking one shouldn't put the hostname in /etc/hosts as it's
not required so long as your DNS is working ... which it should be ...
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[CentOS-announce] CESA-2016:0594 Important CentOS 7 graphite2 Security Update

[Johnny Hughes]

CentOS Errata and Security Advisory 2016:0594 Important

Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016-0594.html

The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently 
syncing to the mirrors: ( sha256sum Filename ) 

x86_64:
5833acac7b610ae47aaff9fff6976044184dcef52f724a1f94142e69e2215116  
graphite2-1.3.6-1.el7_2.i686.rpm
f14d09c338249719f5f75305ee0dc6c32829ad3e45c7bc62b9fa530d37bcd35f  
graphite2-1.3.6-1.el7_2.x86_64.rpm
2ba25e1c7cf6d499d2826dce52b463b1b41b653087a2b02b0a22f0a2ad8e8968  
graphite2-devel-1.3.6-1.el7_2.i686.rpm
1ee921c206f47b305e00b9ead905655decd0c93334962dd6ed74112dc4be6db9  
graphite2-devel-1.3.6-1.el7_2.x86_64.rpm

Source:
24e94805fcb7de71ccd8fd1ecaf44cf56602da1a030a14c4d7862c3bcd87bbea  
graphite2-1.3.6-1.el7_2.src.rpm



-- 
Johnny Hughes
CentOS Project { http://www.centos.org/ }
irc: hughesjr, #cen...@irc.freenode.net
Twitter: @JohnnyCentOS

___
CentOS-announce mailing list
CentOS-announce@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-announce

[CentOS-announce] CEEA-2016:0593 CentOS 7 libguestfs Enhancement Update

[Johnny Hughes]

CentOS Errata and Enhancement Advisory 2016:0593 

Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHEA-2016-0593.html

The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently 
syncing to the mirrors: ( sha256sum Filename ) 

x86_64:
e41f1f0c1e04016bf837b5c5e32523d3cfb6fefa148c273f98a0d3906fd40fba  
libguestfs-1.28.1-1.55.el7.centos.2.x86_64.rpm
1de3c2f505fb7947ce4bf7a02aed54bb841af60c3b2520be629facd9b428aa87  
libguestfs-bash-completion-1.28.1-1.55.el7.centos.2.noarch.rpm
25d7239057eb0e67658bd88e9cd1131adf7cc30dd7248830eb9ff6ad900ec9b0  
libguestfs-devel-1.28.1-1.55.el7.centos.2.x86_64.rpm
f1f49fd37bfe8e79472c85144cfa490f2b603529c590d1bce743cec54c9b4835  
libguestfs-gfs2-1.28.1-1.55.el7.centos.2.x86_64.rpm
99736d954ddbe3cfd11e6a539d818b92a8d2c525fd22246bdba1d7d4cf48c084  
libguestfs-gobject-1.28.1-1.55.el7.centos.2.x86_64.rpm
061eea52827be1f861a79d558bcf50e470de0b9480e2b26a91f0d34726c4fb70  
libguestfs-gobject-devel-1.28.1-1.55.el7.centos.2.x86_64.rpm
124437fac47dfa1fcdf36dfc6f6329c360732dda2ba02c37c46bbabb8516e475  
libguestfs-gobject-doc-1.28.1-1.55.el7.centos.2.noarch.rpm
4595763999e8fbc60b902282e6487175ec1dc0a1967075598ff78b3e54073a41  
libguestfs-java-1.28.1-1.55.el7.centos.2.x86_64.rpm
395de464f35786d4a52e2d340992dc51af77441b862246156f58bd5ea45c942a  
libguestfs-java-devel-1.28.1-1.55.el7.centos.2.x86_64.rpm
fe7d1c1f1018935bf163849aecdb53411556464b5bac0dcbb259c112701add1f  
libguestfs-javadoc-1.28.1-1.55.el7.centos.2.noarch.rpm
55dd3a16b965949628f1ee2a57f7ac3a059650066a7edc6eca681ffae2fbd3e6  
libguestfs-man-pages-ja-1.28.1-1.55.el7.centos.2.noarch.rpm
16fc4d292e720a143f7558d9c831295698b15cb54a02c0ab0323d0756086d2e5  
libguestfs-man-pages-uk-1.28.1-1.55.el7.centos.2.noarch.rpm
1f51f5079763f480e241bb3025b4b188b86c6b6f5c786ed5aee607308b00f01a  
libguestfs-rescue-1.28.1-1.55.el7.centos.2.x86_64.rpm
26e2e13368845dc9c5a87b0026b3d4553e92e4a41769a0f7699c39a000d13ea6  
libguestfs-rsync-1.28.1-1.55.el7.centos.2.x86_64.rpm
0efaaec4a7d7ddc9d38c1b79c11a1c501db0696a16f158afd72d173ed08544c9  
libguestfs-tools-1.28.1-1.55.el7.centos.2.noarch.rpm
16b577c6b8a7058a54afef6dae8080bf922721a2d82c74a105f3172621fe1f0a  
libguestfs-tools-c-1.28.1-1.55.el7.centos.2.x86_64.rpm
45a6688b5ed0f78fd2509e1ed738fe93df957fa0645719089ff2096699d20c65  
libguestfs-xfs-1.28.1-1.55.el7.centos.2.x86_64.rpm
b45d3ddccc275dc1ffc11b527c70b97cc6f1a6ded8c8fb3d36c1b77bedb99656  
lua-guestfs-1.28.1-1.55.el7.centos.2.x86_64.rpm
522dab43977b5ffa55b3580d1b872b6c39d64f3a0647bcc3f610e94b6a4cf359  
ocaml-libguestfs-1.28.1-1.55.el7.centos.2.x86_64.rpm
c18daa1c6e22fa68e43fa4af67432775c4b85117fe8a602e73aa04a24129350c  
ocaml-libguestfs-devel-1.28.1-1.55.el7.centos.2.x86_64.rpm
4a2cf803a443ac25202b14edfd8793f082f108f085f4516cc92ae08979e7593f  
perl-Sys-Guestfs-1.28.1-1.55.el7.centos.2.x86_64.rpm
75b4ef7132a57003bcafca7da181be5a52893cfc57bdef249c2e7dcf217d7cb0  
python-libguestfs-1.28.1-1.55.el7.centos.2.x86_64.rpm
986a65c4ff8627f2b5824ea053c34164a238c8f1b8d8de563be79360d22434da  
ruby-libguestfs-1.28.1-1.55.el7.centos.2.x86_64.rpm
24df4ea90173c3cfc1093235cf61d86fa76c19be7c11df650ad91d322f1c1d61  
virt-v2v-1.28.1-1.55.el7.centos.2.x86_64.rpm

Source:
da1fc6d0671953604c8bf0c9f39a28ffad402fbd10d858f2119fcaa63335e454  
libguestfs-1.28.1-1.55.el7.centos.2.src.rpm



-- 
Johnny Hughes
CentOS Project { http://www.centos.org/ }
irc: hughesjr, #cen...@irc.freenode.net
Twitter: @JohnnyCentOS

___
CentOS-announce mailing list
CentOS-announce@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-announce

Re: [CentOS] How to set hostname and domainnmae in CentOS 7?

[Mark Haney]

vi or your text editor of choice. Though there should be a 'domainname'
command to set it as well, though I just prefer editing /etc/hosts directly.



On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 3:24 PM, Joe Smithian  wrote:

> We can permanently set hostname using  hostnamectl set-hostname. How can we
> permanently set *domain name* in CentOS 7?
> I found an article
> <
> http://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/239920/how-to-set-the-fully-qualified-hostname-on-centos-7-0
> >
> that recommended setting FQDN using hostnamectl. Is that the right way to
> set hostname and domainname at the same time using *hostnamectl
> set-hostname* command?
>
>  Running *hostnamectl set-hostname* will set the hostname in*
> /etc/hostname*
> but it doesn't change */etc/hosts*. What's the proper way of adding
> hostname and FQDN to */etc/hosts *in CentOS 7?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Joe
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>



-- 

Mark Haney ::: Senior Systems Engineer
*VIF* *International Education*
P.O. Box 3566 ::: Chapel Hill, N.C. 27515 ::: USA
919-265-5006 office

Global learning for all.
www.viflearn.com
Find VIF on Facebook  |
Twitter  | LinkedIn


Recognized as a ‘Best for the World’
 B Corp!
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[CentOS] How to set hostname and domainnmae in CentOS 7?

[Joe Smithian]

We can permanently set hostname using  hostnamectl set-hostname. How can we
permanently set *domain name* in CentOS 7?
I found an article

that recommended setting FQDN using hostnamectl. Is that the right way to
set hostname and domainname at the same time using *hostnamectl
set-hostname* command?

 Running *hostnamectl set-hostname* will set the hostname in* /etc/hostname*
but it doesn't change */etc/hosts*. What's the proper way of adding
hostname and FQDN to */etc/hosts *in CentOS 7?

Thanks,

Joe
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Disabling network service in CentOS 7

[James Hogarth]

On 5 Apr 2016 20:11, "Joe Smithian"  wrote:
>
> Hi all,
> I've recently started using NetworkManger service and nmcli tool, I like
it
> much better than the old network service and manually modifying network
> scripts. I've seen many online questions on how to disable NetworkManger
> but I have the opposite question! I am wondering if it be OK to disable
> network service altogether and just use NetworkManger for configuring and
> managing Ethernet interfaces. I care about wired Ethernet interfaces only.
>
> I disabled network service and rebooted my machine without any networking
> problem but I wanted to conform that that would be OK.
>

If you are making use of NetworkManager then there's nothing network does
that would require it still being enabled.

It's perfectly safe to systemctl disable|mask network.service

(Note pay attention that you disable service and not target!)
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[CentOS] How to configure DNS server in RHEL 7 / CentOS 7

[Joe Smithian]

How to configure DNS server and search domain common for all network
interfaces not per device?


The only reliable way I found we can set DNS name server and search domain
in CentOS 7 is using nmcli which adds DNS name server and search domain to *a
specific interface*, e.g. nmcli con mod eth0 +ipv4.dns [IP_ADDRESS]. But I
want to set them for all interfaces weather they are configure and
connected or not. How can we do that?

More back ground information: I am using NetworkManager and nmcli tool to
configure multiple wired Ethernet interfaces on CentOS 7. I want to set
common DNS name server and search domain for all interfaces.
/etc/resolv.conf is generated by NetworkManger and we cannot manually
modify it.

Thanks,
Joe
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[CentOS] Disabling network service in CentOS 7

[Joe Smithian]

Hi all,
I've recently started using NetworkManger service and nmcli tool, I like it
much better than the old network service and manually modifying network
scripts. I've seen many online questions on how to disable NetworkManger
but I have the opposite question! I am wondering if it be OK to disable
network service altogether and just use NetworkManger for configuring and
managing Ethernet interfaces. I care about wired Ethernet interfaces only.

I disabled network service and rebooted my machine without any networking
problem but I wanted to conform that that would be OK.

Thanks,

Joe

On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 12:33 PM, Joe Smithian 
wrote:

> Hi all,
> I've recently started using NetworkManger service and nmcli tool, I like
> it much better than the old network service and manually modifying network
> scripts. I've seen many online questions on how to disable NetworkManger
> but I have the opposite question! I am wondering if it be OK to disable
> network service altogether and just use NetworkManger for configuring and
> managing Ethernet interfaces. I care about wired Ethernet interfaces only.
>
> I disabled network service and rebooted my machine without any networking
> problem but I wanted to conform that that would be OK.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Joe
>
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] VPN suggestions centos 6, 7

[Nux!]

Have a look at Openconnect Server (ocserv), it's a free implementation of Cisco 
AnyConnect.

It's the easiest VPN I ever had to setup and it's compatible with most Cisco 
AnyConnect clients and of course OpenConnect clients (such as 
NetworkManager-openconnect). 

http://www.infradead.org/ocserv/

hth

--
Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!

Nux!
www.nux.ro

- Original Message -
> From: "david" 
> To: "CentOS mailing list" 
> Sent: Monday, 4 April, 2016 18:57:12
> Subject: [CentOS] VPN suggestions centos 6, 7

> Folks
> 
> I would like to have my windows 7 laptop communicate with my home
> server via a VPN, in such a way that it appears to be "inside" my
> home network.  It should not only let me appear to be at home for any
> external query, but also let me access my computers inside my home.
> 
> I already have this working using M$'s PPTP using my home Centos 6
> gateway/router as the PoPToP server.  However, I am concerned about
> the privacy/security of such a connection.
> 
> I have seen discussions of OpenVPN, OpenSwan, LibreVPN, StrongSwan
> (and probably others I haven't noted).  I'd be interested in hearing
> from anyone who wishes to comment about which to use, with the
> following requirements:
> 
> 1)  As noted, it should be secure (anti NSA?)
> 2)  Works on Centos 6 and Centos 7 and Windows 7 (and for the future,
> Windows 10)
> 3)  Can be set up on the server with command line interfaces only (no GUI)
> 
> And, should not be a nightmare to set up.
> 
> Any thoughts?
> 
> David
> 
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] VPN suggestions centos 6, 7

[Lamar Owen]

On 04/05/2016 12:30 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
IPSec is typically encapsulated on UDP port 4500, due to the ubiquity 
of NAT.  OpenVPN doesn't really have an advantage, there.
IPSec and OpenVPN (and the others) each have their use cases.  I have 
had experience with IPSec (via SmoothWall's SmoothTunnel 
implementation), Cisco's VPN implementation, and the commercial OpenVPN 
Access Server, and I have found OpenVPN AS the easiest to support for 
the road warrior use case, including and especially wifi and 3G/4G 
connected ios and android devices.  OpenVPN AS will listen on TCP port 
443, and virtually no one blocks TCP/443 (although you do lose some 
tunnel functionality with TCP encapsulation).


I did have numerous issues with the road warrior cases with the IPSec 
solution, many of which were firewall/captive portal issues and not 
issues with the otherwise excellent SmoothTunnel.  I will admit that I 
have not tried an IPsec solution in a while, but I haven't had the need 
to do so, either.


OpenVPN AS takes all the hard parts out of the server-side config, and 
it works well on CentOS 7 (which is the platform on which I am running 
the server).  For point-to-point remote offices, I deploy small routers 
running DD-WRT, which has a reasonable OpenVPN client that works well 
once you get it working initially.  It isn't necessarily the easiest to 
get working, though.


___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[CentOS-announce] CESA-2016:0591 Moderate CentOS 6 nss Security Update

[Johnny Hughes]

CentOS Errata and Security Advisory 2016:0591 Moderate

Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016-0591.html

The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently 
syncing to the mirrors: ( sha256sum Filename ) 

i386:
5c8974b2d8730e2967751f835f4646bdf46fa968c29769748219ad426c5140d3  
nss-3.21.0-0.3.el6_7.i686.rpm
f3782c46dfadef016d7afe8d81015c92ca5062e738d225377bfb38904e70708d  
nss-devel-3.21.0-0.3.el6_7.i686.rpm
32b9c62453b3dd45c60985751e36ed30aba93ea2f024b4b08443b7b9438eb5a8  
nss-pkcs11-devel-3.21.0-0.3.el6_7.i686.rpm
7ee7fb2e4107b38d7c03677abb588fdd59b28459fa01a67f1a0bfb159295c688  
nss-sysinit-3.21.0-0.3.el6_7.i686.rpm
a24d41eaadacaebcab9e7bf5490dc75028d7360e8484d9f4615b480067299539  
nss-tools-3.21.0-0.3.el6_7.i686.rpm

x86_64:
5c8974b2d8730e2967751f835f4646bdf46fa968c29769748219ad426c5140d3  
nss-3.21.0-0.3.el6_7.i686.rpm
7242d7e199b316736c10a1e97629001a3f2ab4ba540f0e313730ae8a11358544  
nss-3.21.0-0.3.el6_7.x86_64.rpm
f3782c46dfadef016d7afe8d81015c92ca5062e738d225377bfb38904e70708d  
nss-devel-3.21.0-0.3.el6_7.i686.rpm
24a8bfae413d2a0ea8063fe0045615096d0cff4e8ddb483b625f32a20c403fb4  
nss-devel-3.21.0-0.3.el6_7.x86_64.rpm
32b9c62453b3dd45c60985751e36ed30aba93ea2f024b4b08443b7b9438eb5a8  
nss-pkcs11-devel-3.21.0-0.3.el6_7.i686.rpm
dc1976aceb5f1e49dcb95308bc6ae80e9100d759141308f5fb786ac6d49e65b3  
nss-pkcs11-devel-3.21.0-0.3.el6_7.x86_64.rpm
99a95ba3bfebf8d62f4033b0578ff4c0a604becc5e5255700d98ccf305e68cc9  
nss-sysinit-3.21.0-0.3.el6_7.x86_64.rpm
f1af7ca96a93c1ebeeab8051f137e92116d869ba0aa55c28bf7a6d0bcf7b49e7  
nss-tools-3.21.0-0.3.el6_7.x86_64.rpm

Source:
ae57322f9c969f39ae79298247a6a8a795719d1e926d88077a92536b8332409c  
nss-3.21.0-0.3.el6_7.src.rpm



-- 
Johnny Hughes
CentOS Project { http://www.centos.org/ }
irc: hughesjr, #cen...@irc.freenode.net
Twitter: @JohnnyCentOS

___
CentOS-announce mailing list
CentOS-announce@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-announce

[CentOS-announce] CESA-2016:0591 Moderate CentOS 6 nss-util Security Update

[Johnny Hughes]

CentOS Errata and Security Advisory 2016:0591 Moderate

Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016-0591.html

The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently 
syncing to the mirrors: ( sha256sum Filename ) 

i386:
be545dfd2d5da2c62a77f9cc2b40987befdb5c5f669782af9c377f0b85484ff0  
nss-util-3.21.0-0.3.el6_7.i686.rpm
56806dccf241355a1b9cba4e1595f54abbe5a5b1f92b9a4d4f5b7d8091bc7325  
nss-util-devel-3.21.0-0.3.el6_7.i686.rpm

x86_64:
be545dfd2d5da2c62a77f9cc2b40987befdb5c5f669782af9c377f0b85484ff0  
nss-util-3.21.0-0.3.el6_7.i686.rpm
a7241304459acb2e2dca19fa7a61f516f2a38aa3e4440d1a2f001de413c54e1f  
nss-util-3.21.0-0.3.el6_7.x86_64.rpm
56806dccf241355a1b9cba4e1595f54abbe5a5b1f92b9a4d4f5b7d8091bc7325  
nss-util-devel-3.21.0-0.3.el6_7.i686.rpm
7cb08f5c7d2c44566206fc7fb5c9dcb380b9ec3e036eecf3bc99ec764e95043e  
nss-util-devel-3.21.0-0.3.el6_7.x86_64.rpm

Source:
3c391ab73bc502dc1a1aa74a1aeda1ddf08aee80c85ed02396808117d1a89ce5  
nss-util-3.21.0-0.3.el6_7.src.rpm



-- 
Johnny Hughes
CentOS Project { http://www.centos.org/ }
irc: hughesjr, #cen...@irc.freenode.net
Twitter: @JohnnyCentOS

___
CentOS-announce mailing list
CentOS-announce@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-announce

[CentOS-announce] CESA-2016:0591 Moderate CentOS 6 nspr Security Update

[Johnny Hughes]

CentOS Errata and Security Advisory 2016:0591 Moderate

Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016-0591.html

The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently 
syncing to the mirrors: ( sha256sum Filename ) 

i386:
3b223ca6b209603975d7067ca45911b0f61f445196fb4b87e8e30b881ba9c2e5  
nspr-4.11.0-0.1.el6_7.i686.rpm
e9f94771ef76b6bb895aaf2b196e90c1e9c3aafeb11177afc03a21d90be4ad34  
nspr-devel-4.11.0-0.1.el6_7.i686.rpm

x86_64:
3b223ca6b209603975d7067ca45911b0f61f445196fb4b87e8e30b881ba9c2e5  
nspr-4.11.0-0.1.el6_7.i686.rpm
3d109fb2c496edf99f41fd9db08769239caef7758ea6abf118ffe72b1de57c94  
nspr-4.11.0-0.1.el6_7.x86_64.rpm
e9f94771ef76b6bb895aaf2b196e90c1e9c3aafeb11177afc03a21d90be4ad34  
nspr-devel-4.11.0-0.1.el6_7.i686.rpm
14a47d3277db192096307cb88c8072df5b15257db7b352bf731fa54227a46c42  
nspr-devel-4.11.0-0.1.el6_7.x86_64.rpm

Source:
34bfff2b29fc9e980193a8cdc85aa65bae37e6c8e622de0882d0237365aa0c47  
nspr-4.11.0-0.1.el6_7.src.rpm



-- 
Johnny Hughes
CentOS Project { http://www.centos.org/ }
irc: hughesjr, #cen...@irc.freenode.net
Twitter: @JohnnyCentOS

___
CentOS-announce mailing list
CentOS-announce@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-announce

Re: [CentOS] VPN suggestions centos 6, 7

[Eero Volotinen]

Yes, openvpn works on any single udp or tcp port.

On many hotels only http, https and dns allowed. So you just can't use
ipsec, but openvpn works as it's usually configured to listen https port.

--
Eero

2016-04-05 19:30 GMT+03:00 Gordon Messmer :

> On 04/05/2016 12:07 AM, Eero Volotinen wrote:
>
>> IPSec is not recommended solution nowdays. OpenVPN runs top of single udp
>> or tcp port, so it usually works on strictly firewalled places like in
>> hotels and so on.
>>
>
> IPSec is typically encapsulated on UDP port 4500, due to the ubiquity of
> NAT.  OpenVPN doesn't really have an advantage, there.
>
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] VPN suggestions centos 6, 7

[Gordon Messmer]

On 04/05/2016 08:52 AM, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote:

For host-to-site setups I prefer OpenVPN since explaining to endusers
how to set up an ipsec connection is neigh impossible


So, send them a powershell script:

Add-VpnConnection -Name "My VPN" -ServerAddress "vpn.example.com" 
-AuthenticationMethod PAP -TunnelType L2TP -L2tpPsk 
"whyareyouusingapsk?" -AllUserConnection -Force -RememberCredential 
-PassThru -SplitTunneling

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] VPN suggestions centos 6, 7

[Gordon Messmer]

On 04/05/2016 12:07 AM, Eero Volotinen wrote:

IPSec is not recommended solution nowdays. OpenVPN runs top of single udp
or tcp port, so it usually works on strictly firewalled places like in
hotels and so on.


IPSec is typically encapsulated on UDP port 4500, due to the ubiquity of 
NAT.  OpenVPN doesn't really have an advantage, there.

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[CentOS] virt-manager virtual USB disk unavailable option

[Roberto Cantalapiedra]

Hi,

I have installed virt-manager 1.3.2 and I want to create a virtual USB disk
(not USB  host passthrough) but unfortunately I don't see that option when
I try to add a new storage hardware. I have another PC with virt-manager
0.9.5 and Linux Mint and I have that option and it is working perfectly.
My CentOS version is: 7.2.1511

Thanks in advance

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Free Redhat Linux (rhel) version 7.2

[Always Learning]

On Tue, 2016-04-05 at 08:16 -0700, Akemi Yagi wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 8:08 AM, Always Learning  wrote:
> 
> >
> > What matters for the 'free' Red Hat software is ***ONLY*** Red Hat's
> > stated terms and conditions - definitely not what someone else has
> > put on a web site.

>  Here is the link:
> 
> https://developers.redhat.com/terms-and-conditions/


Thanks Akemi.

I remind everyone, who is interested, that the absence of clearly
expressed definitions in

https://developers.redhat.com/terms-and-conditions/

(a) 'development purposes only'

(b) 'a production installation'

and the lack of specific detail on
http://www.redhat.com/en/about/licenses (English version)

means Red Hat would experience difficulties proving commercial loss,
other than a subscription fee loss.

Even a subscription fee loss might be difficult for Red Hat to prove
taking into consideration Red Hat knew, or had good cause to know or was
recklessly indifferent to users comprehensively knowing precisely what
Red Hat meant by (a) and (b) above.

A defendant could argue that Red Hat deliberately withheld that vital
knowledge from the unsuspecting users because Red Hat sought to exploit
users lack of full and detailed knowledge of the restrictions by
extorting money from users for commercial gain - a gain that would not
have been available to Red Hat if Red Hat had been a lot more specific
about the full extent of its limitations.

One could legally argue that a criminal fraud was committed by obtaining
a free copy when the intention was to use it for conspicuous commercial
purposes. That argument is unlikely to apply to a person running their
own private system for non-commercial gain.

Don't be frightened by Red Hat's statement "are required to pay the
applicable subscription fees, in addition to any and all other remedies
available to Red Hat under applicable law"

"Other remedies" is fantasy. No one can possible legally commit
themselves to unknown and undefined "other remedies" as Red Hat's
lawyers should know.  Seems like US of A style "bullying tactics"
intended to frighten people without access to affordable competent legal
advice.

Me ? Well I am staying on C6 :-)


-- 
Regards,

Paul.
England, EU.  England's place is in the European Union.

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] VPN suggestions centos 6, 7

[Dennis Jacobfeuerborn]

How is IPSec "not recommended solution nowdays"?

I tend to use IPSec for site-to-site connections i.e. the ones that run
24/7 and only require two experienced people to set up (the admins at
both endpoints).
For host-to-site setups I prefer OpenVPN since explaining to endusers
how to set up an ipsec connection is neigh impossible whereas with
OpenVPN I can simply tell them to install the software and then unzip an
archive into a directory and they are done.

Regards,
  Dennis

On 05.04.2016 09:07, Eero Volotinen wrote:
> IPSec is not recommended solution nowdays. OpenVPN runs top of single udp
> or tcp port, so it usually works on strictly firewalled places like in
> hotels and so on.
> 
> --
> Eero
> 
> 2016-04-04 23:18 GMT+03:00 Gordon Messmer :
> 
>> On 04/04/2016 10:57 AM, david wrote:
>>
>>> I have seen discussions of OpenVPN, OpenSwan, LibreVPN, StrongSwan (and
>>> probably others I haven't noted).  I'd be interested in hearing from anyone
>>> who wishes to comment about which to use, with the following requirements:
>>>
>>
>> I recommend l2tp/ipsec.  It's supported out of the box on a wide variety
>> of client platforms, which means significantly less work to set up the
>> clients.
>>
>> OpenVPN is a popular choice, and it's fine for most people.  It's more
>> work to set up than l2tp/ipsec, typically.  We used it for quite a while at
>> my previous employer, though ultimately dropped it because the Windows GUI
>> requires admin rights to run, and we didn't want to continue giving admin
>> rights to the users we supported.
>>
>> ___
>> CentOS mailing list
>> CentOS@centos.org
>> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>>
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
> 

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] VPN suggestions centos 6, 7

[Eero Volotinen]

Well. IPSec might work with site-to-site connections, but usually
roadwarrior mode users experience (a lot of) problems.

They might be related to hotels that only allow https, http and dns
protocols or broken nat implementations and so on.



--
Eero

2016-04-05 18:52 GMT+03:00 Dennis Jacobfeuerborn :

> How is IPSec "not recommended solution nowdays"?
>
> I tend to use IPSec for site-to-site connections i.e. the ones that run
> 24/7 and only require two experienced people to set up (the admins at
> both endpoints).
> For host-to-site setups I prefer OpenVPN since explaining to endusers
> how to set up an ipsec connection is neigh impossible whereas with
> OpenVPN I can simply tell them to install the software and then unzip an
> archive into a directory and they are done.
>
> Regards,
>   Dennis
>
> On 05.04.2016 09:07, Eero Volotinen wrote:
> > IPSec is not recommended solution nowdays. OpenVPN runs top of single udp
> > or tcp port, so it usually works on strictly firewalled places like in
> > hotels and so on.
> >
> > --
> > Eero
> >
> > 2016-04-04 23:18 GMT+03:00 Gordon Messmer :
> >
> >> On 04/04/2016 10:57 AM, david wrote:
> >>
> >>> I have seen discussions of OpenVPN, OpenSwan, LibreVPN, StrongSwan (and
> >>> probably others I haven't noted).  I'd be interested in hearing from
> anyone
> >>> who wishes to comment about which to use, with the following
> requirements:
> >>>
> >>
> >> I recommend l2tp/ipsec.  It's supported out of the box on a wide variety
> >> of client platforms, which means significantly less work to set up the
> >> clients.
> >>
> >> OpenVPN is a popular choice, and it's fine for most people.  It's more
> >> work to set up than l2tp/ipsec, typically.  We used it for quite a
> while at
> >> my previous employer, though ultimately dropped it because the Windows
> GUI
> >> requires admin rights to run, and we didn't want to continue giving
> admin
> >> rights to the users we supported.
> >>
> >> ___
> >> CentOS mailing list
> >> CentOS@centos.org
> >> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
> >>
> > ___
> > CentOS mailing list
> > CentOS@centos.org
> > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
> >
>
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Free Redhat Linux (rhel) version 7.2

[Akemi Yagi]

On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 8:08 AM, Always Learning  wrote:

>
> What matters for the 'free' Red Hat software is ***ONLY*** Red Hat's
> stated terms and conditions - definitely not what what someone else has
> put on a web site.
>
> Here is the link:

https://developers.redhat.com/terms-and-conditions/

Akemi
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Free Redhat Linux (rhel) version 7.2

[Always Learning]

On Tue, 2016-04-05 at 11:17 +0200, Maikel van Leeuwen wrote:

> Techopedia explains Production Server
> 
> A production server is the core server on which any website or Web
> application is being hosted and accessed by users. It is part of the
> entire software and application development environment. Typically, the
> production server environment, hardware and software components are
> exactly similar to a staging server.
> 
> Though, rather being confined to in-house usage as in a staging server,
> the production server is open for end-user access. The software or
> application must be tested and debugged on a staging server before being
> deployed on the production server."

That is not applicable legally.  

What matters for the 'free' Red Hat software is ***ONLY*** Red Hat's
stated terms and conditions - definitely not what what someone else has
put on a web site.


-- 
Regards,

Paul.
England, EU.  England's place is in the European Union.

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Free Redhat Linux (rhel) version 7.2

[Always Learning]

On Tue, 2016-04-05 at 07:55 -0500, Valeri Galtsev wrote:

> Production means you are benefiting from running server in any form.
> Making money is only one form of benefit. The rest are hard to list
> without knowing what exactly you do but the general approach in court
> would be: you will not be running server and not using it for something.
> Apart from testing that some software builds on that you can not use that
> server for anything else. And it is not a coincidence that they list
> explicitly what you can use it for. Because using it for anything else
> will be illegal (which will be established in court, but I have to mention
> I am not a lawyer).

Neither am I a lawyer.

Unless the term 'production' is clearly defined in the license, then the
popular and widely used meaning of 'production' would constitute the
criteria.

It is not for users to define what Red Hat Inc's license implies - that
is solely a matter for Read Hat to make ***before*** Red Hat donates its
software or unlocks its software for use. Legally, Red Hat could not
retrospectively impose any definition of 'production' or introduce
licensing or usage terms. 

It will not be 'illegal' because it is not a criminal offence unless a
law exists forbidding that action. I think that 'exceeding' the terms of
the license would not make a criminal offence.

Criminal = public law
Non-criminal = private law

The best Red Hat could do is to sue users for Red Hat's 'lost' (just
think of the world-wide damaging publicity) and that will mean Red Hat
would have to prove to the civil standard of evidence the monetary
amount of that loss.

As the alleged 'loss' may occur outside the US of A, Red Hat would have
to sue in the legal jurisdiction where that matter occurred.

In England, the Small Claims Courts determines cases up to GBP 10,000
***and*** the costs of lawyers, I verily believe, are neither awarded
nor recoverable.



-- 
Regards,

Paul.
England, EU.  England's place is in the European Union.

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[CentOS-virt] Reminder: Virt SIG meeting at 3pm BST (2pm UTC) today on #centos-devel

[George Dunlap]

Reminder that (at least for the moment), unlike many of the other
meetings, our meeting is on British time at 3pm.

 -George
___
CentOS-virt mailing list
CentOS-virt@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt

Re: [CentOS] Free Redhat Linux (rhel) version 7.2

[James Hogarth]

On 5 April 2016 at 13:31, Liam O'Toole  wrote:

> On 2016-04-04, Timothy Murphy
>  wrote:
> > I read that Redhat was offering their Linux free, and downloaded the
> > ISO, though I haven't run it.
> >
> > What do CentOS users think of Redhat's offer?
>
> I think it's an excellent opportunity for developers, and for the simply
> curious.
>
> >
> > The registration with Redhat seemed very bureaucratic to me,
> > and I'm not sure if I have carried it out properly.
>
> You should receive an email confirmation from Red Hat. In my case it
> only arrived after I had entered my RH account details when installing
> the new OS. That could just be a coincidence, of course.
>
> > Also, I didn't see if it was possible to get updates,
> > either with dnf or some other way.
>
> Updates are available through yum in the normal way. Dnf is available in
> the EPEL 7 repository.
>
>
I wouldn't use dnf from EPEL though ;)


> >
> > I've been (and am) very pleased with CentOS,
> > which I've been running for several years,
> > and I don't particularly want to change.
> >
> > Any views on this?
>
> One thing that struck me is that the (free) developer subscription is
> valid for only one year. It is not clear whether the subscription can be
> freely renewed thereafter. I wouldn't advocate a full migration just
> yet!
>
>
The $99 sub is per year, this is just a free version of that and RH have no
way (nor would it be sensible for them to) create an unlimited life
subscription on their systems/platform.

How long they'll keep this programme? Well that's crystal ball time and I
guess depends on the uptake and how this helps with their developers
conferences.

It's not like they lock you in with proprietary tech though ...
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Free Redhat Linux (rhel) version 7.2

[Valeri Galtsev]

On Tue, April 5, 2016 4:06 am, Timothy Murphy wrote:
> Johnny Hughes wrote:
>
>> On 04/04/2016 08:39 AM, Timothy Murphy wrote:
>
>>> I read that Redhat was offering their Linux free,
>>> and downloaded the ISO, though I haven't run it.
>>>
>>> What do CentOS users think of Redhat's offer?
>
>> You need read the usage license.
>
> I glanced through this before downloading the ISO.
> But I can't locate it now on the RedHat website(s).
>
>> That subscription can only be used in development and not in a
>> production environment.
>>
>> If that works for want you want to use it for then it is an awesome move
>> by Red Hat.
>
> I run CentOS on two home servers (in different countries),
> and have no ambition to make money from them,
> which I take is the meaning of "production" in this context.

Production means you are benefiting from running server in any form.
Making money is only one form of benefit. The rest are hard to list
without knowing what exactly you do but the general approach in court
would be: you will not be running server and not using it for something.
Apart from testing that some software builds on that you can not use that
server for anything else. And it is not a coincidence that they list
explicitly what you can use it for. Because using it for anything else
will be illegal (which will be established in court, but I have to mention
I am not a lawyer).

I did not read RedHat's license about what we discuss here, but I have
carefully been once through Intel compilers non-for-profit license.
Scientists who I work for are in "non-for-profit" organizations. What they
do, however, does not fall under the "non-for-profit" Intel license.
Because that license prohibits to profit in any form (not on by making
monetary profit from selling things). Other forms of profit would be:
making better code, and potentially getting better job than your colleague
to name one.

In general, benefiting can be anything, even looking at nice RedHat logo
and being pleased with yourself that you were able to install the system.
This is the difference of free license (where you are explicitly permitted
to do anything except...) from non-free (where you are explicitly
permitted to do this, and nothing else).

But don't listen to me, ask the layer.

Valeri

>
> Surely there must be many CentOS users like me?
> I found puzzling the suggestion (not by Johnny Hughes)
> that RedHat's offer is of little value.
>
> --
> Timothy Murphy
> gayleard /at/ eircom.net
> School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin
>
>
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>



Valeri Galtsev
Sr System Administrator
Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics
Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics
University of Chicago
Phone: 773-702-4247

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Free Redhat Linux (rhel) version 7.2

[Liam O'Toole]

On 2016-04-04, Timothy Murphy
 wrote:
> I read that Redhat was offering their Linux free, and downloaded the
> ISO, though I haven't run it.
>
> What do CentOS users think of Redhat's offer?

I think it's an excellent opportunity for developers, and for the simply
curious.

>
> The registration with Redhat seemed very bureaucratic to me,
> and I'm not sure if I have carried it out properly.

You should receive an email confirmation from Red Hat. In my case it
only arrived after I had entered my RH account details when installing
the new OS. That could just be a coincidence, of course.

> Also, I didn't see if it was possible to get updates,
> either with dnf or some other way.

Updates are available through yum in the normal way. Dnf is available in
the EPEL 7 repository.

>
> I've been (and am) very pleased with CentOS,
> which I've been running for several years,
> and I don't particularly want to change.
>
> Any views on this?

One thing that struck me is that the (free) developer subscription is
valid for only one year. It is not clear whether the subscription can be
freely renewed thereafter. I wouldn't advocate a full migration just
yet!

-- 

Liam


___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] VPN suggestions centos 6, 7

[Leon Fauster]

Am 05.04.2016 um 12:46 schrieb Francis Mendoza :
> OpenVPN is the best opensource VPN for me it can connect to any connection
> such as airport, hotel, restaurant, resorts, malls it never let me down.
> And configuration is easy on those who have idea on what they want to
> achieve.

"easy" is qualitative - PKI is the core of an OpenVPN infrastructure and not 
trivial anyway.
As some one stated before privacy/security is complex everything else is a 
product.

IMHO: IPSec-VPN is a bit more complex then a SSL-VPN like OpenVPN. 

I even sometimes use an SSL-VPN connection over an IPSec-VPN.

--
LF

  
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Free Redhat Linux (rhel) version 7.2

[Leon Fauster]

Am 05.04.2016 um 11:06 schrieb Timothy Murphy :
> I run CentOS on two home servers (in different countries),
> and have no ambition to make money from them,
> which I take is the meaning of "production" in this context.
> 
> Surely there must be many CentOS users like me?
> I found puzzling the suggestion (not by Johnny Hughes)
> that RedHat's offer is of little value.

The value of the offer depends of your assets and values.

--
LF


___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[CentOS] CentOS-announce Digest, Vol 134, Issue 3

[centos-announce-request]

Send CentOS-announce mailing list submissions to
centos-annou...@centos.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-announce
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
centos-announce-requ...@centos.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
centos-announce-ow...@centos.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of CentOS-announce digest..."


Today's Topics:

   1. Infra - CentOS forums migration (Fabian Arrotin)


--

Message: 1
Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2016 17:33:17 +0200
From: Fabian Arrotin 
To: centos-annou...@centos.org
Subject: [CentOS-announce] Infra - CentOS forums migration
Message-ID: <5702893d.5090...@centos.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Just to inform you that we'll move some services to a new node, and so
there will be a small impact for the following services :
- https://www.centos.org (no real downtime, as it will just be
redirected automatically)
- https://www.centos.org/forums (see below)

During that migration we'll also consolidate IPv6 and IPv4 connectivity
and also we'll be able to implement higher protocol than TLS 1.0
(because we are/were still using a CentOS 5  based node in the previous
setup)

Migration is scheduled for Wednesday April 6th, 7:00 am UTC time.
You can convert to local time with $(date -d '2016-04-06 7:00 UTC')

The expected "downtime" is estimated to ~30 minutes , time needed to
update/propagate updated dns A/ record[s] + last mysql dump/restore
on the
new node.

Thanks for your comprehending and patience.

on behalf of the Infra team,
-- 
Fabian Arrotin
The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org
gpg key: 56BEC54E | twitter: @arrfab

-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: 


--

___
CentOS-announce mailing list
centos-annou...@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-announce


End of CentOS-announce Digest, Vol 134, Issue 3
***
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] VPN suggestions centos 6, 7

[Francis Mendoza]

OpenVPN is the best opensource VPN for me it can connect to any connection
such as airport, hotel, restaurant, resorts, malls it never let me down.
And configuration is easy on those who have idea on what they want to
achieve.

On Tuesday, 5 April 2016, Eero Volotinen  wrote:

> IPSec is not recommended solution nowdays. OpenVPN runs top of single udp
> or tcp port, so it usually works on strictly firewalled places like in
> hotels and so on.
>
> --
> Eero
>
> 2016-04-04 23:18 GMT+03:00 Gordon Messmer  >:
>
> > On 04/04/2016 10:57 AM, david wrote:
> >
> >> I have seen discussions of OpenVPN, OpenSwan, LibreVPN, StrongSwan (and
> >> probably others I haven't noted).  I'd be interested in hearing from
> anyone
> >> who wishes to comment about which to use, with the following
> requirements:
> >>
> >
> > I recommend l2tp/ipsec.  It's supported out of the box on a wide variety
> > of client platforms, which means significantly less work to set up the
> > clients.
> >
> > OpenVPN is a popular choice, and it's fine for most people.  It's more
> > work to set up than l2tp/ipsec, typically.  We used it for quite a while
> at
> > my previous employer, though ultimately dropped it because the Windows
> GUI
> > requires admin rights to run, and we didn't want to continue giving admin
> > rights to the users we supported.
> >
> > ___
> > CentOS mailing list
> > CentOS@centos.org 
> > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
> >
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org 
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Free Redhat Linux (rhel) version 7.2

[Maikel van Leeuwen]

On 04/05/2016 11:06 AM, Timothy Murphy wrote:
> Johnny Hughes wrote:
>
>> On 04/04/2016 08:39 AM, Timothy Murphy wrote:
>>> I read that Redhat was offering their Linux free,
>>> and downloaded the ISO, though I haven't run it.
>>>
>>> What do CentOS users think of Redhat's offer?
>> You need read the usage license.
> I glanced through this before downloading the ISO.
> But I can't locate it now on the RedHat website(s).
>
>> That subscription can only be used in development and not in a
>> production environment.
>>
>> If that works for want you want to use it for then it is an awesome move
>> by Red Hat.
> I run CentOS on two home servers (in different countries),
> and have no ambition to make money from them,
> which I take is the meaning of "production" in this context.
No, it is not. Please check out the definition of 'production' software
in relation to staging,testing and development.
"



Techopedia explains Production Server

A production server is the core server on which any website or Web
application is being hosted and accessed by users. It is part of the
entire software and application development environment. Typically, the
production server environment, hardware and software components are
exactly similar to a staging server.

Though, rather being confined to in-house usage as in a staging server,
the production server is open for end-user access. The software or
application must be tested and debugged on a staging server before being
deployed on the production server."



> Surely there must be many CentOS users like me?
> I found puzzling the suggestion (not by Johnny Hughes)
> that RedHat's offer is of little value.
>
Centos != Redhat



___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Free Redhat Linux (rhel) version 7.2

[Timothy Murphy]

Johnny Hughes wrote:

> On 04/04/2016 08:39 AM, Timothy Murphy wrote:

>> I read that Redhat was offering their Linux free,
>> and downloaded the ISO, though I haven't run it.
>> 
>> What do CentOS users think of Redhat's offer?

> You need read the usage license.

I glanced through this before downloading the ISO.
But I can't locate it now on the RedHat website(s).

> That subscription can only be used in development and not in a
> production environment.
> 
> If that works for want you want to use it for then it is an awesome move
> by Red Hat.

I run CentOS on two home servers (in different countries),
and have no ambition to make money from them,
which I take is the meaning of "production" in this context.

Surely there must be many CentOS users like me?
I found puzzling the suggestion (not by Johnny Hughes)
that RedHat's offer is of little value.

-- 
Timothy Murphy  
gayleard /at/ eircom.net
School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin


___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[CentOS] email

[gemma adlawan]

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] VPN suggestions centos 6, 7

[Eero Volotinen]

IPSec is not recommended solution nowdays. OpenVPN runs top of single udp
or tcp port, so it usually works on strictly firewalled places like in
hotels and so on.

--
Eero

2016-04-04 23:18 GMT+03:00 Gordon Messmer :

> On 04/04/2016 10:57 AM, david wrote:
>
>> I have seen discussions of OpenVPN, OpenSwan, LibreVPN, StrongSwan (and
>> probably others I haven't noted).  I'd be interested in hearing from anyone
>> who wishes to comment about which to use, with the following requirements:
>>
>
> I recommend l2tp/ipsec.  It's supported out of the box on a wide variety
> of client platforms, which means significantly less work to set up the
> clients.
>
> OpenVPN is a popular choice, and it's fine for most people.  It's more
> work to set up than l2tp/ipsec, typically.  We used it for quite a while at
> my previous employer, though ultimately dropped it because the Windows GUI
> requires admin rights to run, and we didn't want to continue giving admin
> rights to the users we supported.
>
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] How to install VPN server

[Maikel van Leeuwen]

Hi,

You'll find a comprehensive guide on the Arch wiki
(https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/OpenVPN).
Please read first the setup of the PKI, then read further how to setup a
VPN environment.  I particular like this howto, because it survived the
recent security holes of OpenSSL.

But this is just one solution and there are many more, like Ipsec.  The
article mentioned above should be fine for your case

In regards,
Maikel

> Hi All,
>
> I have running centos 6 server in my head quarters and branch offices.
>
> I need to access file server files in both location using VPN.
>
> How to setup vpn server in both location and how to access it.
>
> Could any one help me.
>

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[CentOS] How to install VPN server

[Chandran Manikandan]

Hi All,

I have running centos 6 server in my head quarters and branch offices.

I need to access file server files in both location using VPN.

How to setup vpn server in both location and how to access it.

Could any one help me.

-- 
*Thanks,*
*Manikandan.C*
*System Administrator*
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos