Not even when started with --posix, or with the env var POSIXLY_CORRECT.
perhaps bash needs a --really-really-posix flag... 8-/
2014-02-25 8:44 GMT+01:00 Dennis Davis dennisdavis+openbsd-m...@fastmail.fm
:
On Tue, 25 Feb 2014, Ingo Schwarze wrote:
From: Ingo Schwarze schwa...@usta.de
To:
Hi,
looking at GSOC2014 OpenBSD Foundation's idea list, I found a reference
to some Perl and Python bindings to smtpd's own content filtering
framework.
Is this content filtering api documented anywhere? I found no mention in
smtpd.conf(5) or smtpd(8) man pages.
I'd like to know whether this
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 11:16:40AM +0100, Francesco Toscan wrote:
Hi,
Hi,
looking at GSOC2014 OpenBSD Foundation's idea list, I found a reference
to some Perl and Python bindings to smtpd's own content filtering
framework.
yup, experimental but fonctional stuff, not usable by
Hi Gilles,
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 11:37:47AM +0100, Gilles Chehade wrote:
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 11:16:40AM +0100, Francesco Toscan wrote:
Is this content filtering api documented anywhere? I found no mention in
smtpd.conf(5) or smtpd(8) man pages.
nope because we're still stabilizing
Hi @misc,
I am facing an issue between two boxes (box1 and box2) connected
through an IPsec tunnel.
They are both on the same subnet and both listen on port 22 (sshd running)
When the ipsec tunnel is down and encap routes are flushed on both
boxes (ipsecctl -F), performing a telnet ip_of_box1 22
I recently configured smptd to replace a postfix-based solution.
smtpd(8) is a joy to work with. In ~four rules I had a working email
server!
My next goals was to get content filtering in place. I decided on
amavisd-new with clamav and spamassassin.
I couldn't find any tutorials for using
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 11:30, Aaron Poffenberger wrote:
When amavisd re-injected the email it was rejected by smtpd because To:
user is an invalid recipient. The solution, then, was to defer the
virtual vmap lookup until re-injection. The way to do do that was to
use relay via:
# public
On Feb 26, 2014, at 11:51 AM, Ted Unangst t...@tedunangst.com wrote:
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 11:30, Aaron Poffenberger wrote:
When amavisd re-injected the email it was rejected by smtpd because To:
user is an invalid recipient. The solution, then, was to defer the
virtual vmap lookup until
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014, Aaron Poffenberger wrote:
I tried that. If you telnet into smtpd to manually send an email and set
rcpt to: user you will receive a 553 Recipient address syntax
That's invalid even if you gave a proper address.
RFC 5321:
RCPT TO:forward-path [ SP rcpt-parameters ]
On Feb 26, 2014, at 1:15 PM, Claus Assmann ca+openbsd_m...@esmtp.org wrote:
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014, Aaron Poffenberger wrote:
I tried that. If you telnet into smtpd to manually send an email and set
rcpt to: user you will receive a 553 Recipient address syntax
That's invalid even if you
On 24/02/2014, at 9:33 PM, Henning Brauer wrote:
* Richard Procter richard.n.proc...@gmail.com [2014-01-25 20:41]:
On 22/01/2014, at 7:19 PM, Henning Brauer wrote:
* Richard Procter richard.n.proc...@gmail.com [2014-01-22 06:44]:
This fundamentally weakens its usefulness, though: a correct
On 24/02/2014, at 9:33 PM, Henning Brauer wrote:
* Richard Procter richard.n.proc...@gmail.com [2014-01-25 20:41]:
On 22/01/2014, at 7:19 PM, Henning Brauer wrote:
* Richard Procter richard.n.proc...@gmail.com [2014-01-22 06:44]:
This fundamentally weakens its usefulness, though: a
Again, it's not just me saying it: ...checksums are used by
higher layers to ensure that data was not corrupted in
intermediate routers or by the sending or receiving host.
The fact that checksums are typically the secondary level of
protection has often led to suggestions that checksums are
I'm trying to get a L2TP VPN working using npppd; I think I'm most of the
way there but packets just aren't quite flowing. I'm not sure why, but I
think I might be missing something or misunderstanding something with pf.
I've got ipsec=YES and isakmpd_flags=-K in rc.conf.local, and
On 2014-02-26, Josh mylis...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi @misc,
I am facing an issue between two boxes (box1 and box2) connected
through an IPsec tunnel.
They are both on the same subnet and both listen on port 22 (sshd running)
When the ipsec tunnel is down and encap routes are flushed on both
On 27/02/2014, at 11:04 AM, Theo de Raadt wrote:
I believe you are posting cast aspersions on the pf efforts.
Theo,
I'll insist then that I think pf is a superior piece of code
which I benefit from every day, and that Henning's efforts
to simplify it are so very welcome in a world addicted to
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 11:00 AM, Stuart Henderson s...@spacehopper.org wrote:
Try tcpdumping packets going over the ipsec tunnel, do you see those packets
which should be local actually being sent over the tunnel? If so, I don't have
an answer for this, but I've seen it myself, though only
Hi,
On Wed, 26 Feb 2014 16:32:34 -0800
Paul B. Henson hen...@acm.org wrote:
I currently have the following in pf.conf:
-
pass quick proto { esp, ah } from any to any
pass in quick on em1 proto udp from any to 96.251.22.154 port {500, 4500,
1701} keep state
set skip on enc0
set skip
18 matches
Mail list logo
