Send inn-workers mailing list submissions to
[email protected]
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/inn-workers
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
[email protected]
You can reach the person managing the list at
[email protected]
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of inn-workers digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: INN 2.5.4 strange crash (Julien ?LIE)
2. Re: nnrp conf (Julien ?LIE)
3. Re: nnrp conf (Noel Butler)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2015 22:08:23 +0100
From: Julien ?LIE <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: INN 2.5.4 strange crash
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Hi Petr,
>> Incidentally, these EAGAIN errors are very frequent on your server.
>> Don't you have issues with other programs? Is it only happening with INN?
>
> Looks like, yes, only with innd.
> But, I remind you, this is old FreeBSD box (4.11). Same INN version works
> without this problem on more modern Linux box.
>
> INN 2.4.3 worked fine on this FreeBSD box, from time to time I have seen
> "blocked sleeping" messages, but innd never crash.
Unfortunately, I do not know how to further fix the issue you have on
this old FreeBSD box.
If I understand well your message, innd no longer crashes when you use
the suggested patch, doesn't it? So if I just commit it (without the
"was not sleeping" debugging stuff) so that it is included with INN
2.5.5, would it be OK for you or is there something that still disturbs
you when using INN with that patch?
--
Julien ?LIE
? ? Maintenant les Romains sont alert?s.
? En tout cas, ceux-l? ne sont plus tr?s alertes ! ? (Ast?rix)
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2015 22:23:42 +0100
From: Julien ?LIE <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: nnrp conf
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Hi Edwardo,
> I think as other say, be better for very clear example in add user: <EXAMPLE>
>
> This is still confuse, this what leed to my server be open to
> everyone, someway, it did not work this procedure because I try follow
> that at first.
OK, I see where the confusion came. I then suggest the following new
wording. Would it suit both you and Noel?
auth example.com {
hosts: "*.example.com, example.com"
default: "<EXAMPLE>"
}
access full {
users: "<EXAMPLE>"
newsgroups: *
}
Note that the above access realm could also be written without the
users: key, in which case it applies to any user identity (though in
this example, the user identity that will be assigned to all matching
connections is C<< <EXAMPLE> >>). It is however recommended to keep
an explicit users: key so as to better view to whom the access block
applies.
As the only available auth realm only matches hosts in the "example.com"
domain, any connections from other hosts will be rejected immediately.
--
Julien ?LIE
? ? Maintenant les Romains sont alert?s.
? En tout cas, ceux-l? ne sont plus tr?s alertes ! ? (Ast?rix)
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2015 17:04:13 +1000
From: Noel Butler <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: nnrp conf
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
sounds peachy :)
On 18/03/2015 07:23, Julien ?LIE wrote:
> Hi Edwardo,
>
>> I think as other say, be better for very clear example in add user:
>> <EXAMPLE> This is still confuse, this what leed to my server be open to
>> everyone, someway, it did not work this procedure because I try follow that
>> at first.
>
> OK, I see where the confusion came. I then suggest the following new wording.
> Would it suit both you and Noel?
>
> auth example.com {
> hosts: "*.example.com, example.com"
> default: "<EXAMPLE>"
> }
>
> access full {
> users: "<EXAMPLE>"
> newsgroups: *
> }
>
> Note that the above access realm could also be written without the
> users: key, in which case it applies to any user identity (though in
> this example, the user identity that will be assigned to all matching
> connections is C<< <EXAMPLE> >>). It is however recommended to keep
> an explicit users: key so as to better view to whom the access block
> applies.
>
> As the only available auth realm only matches hosts in the "example.com"
> domain, any connections from other hosts will be rejected immediately.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://lists.isc.org/pipermail/inn-workers/attachments/20150318/b757b8b9/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
inn-workers mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/inn-workers
End of inn-workers Digest, Vol 70, Issue 1
******************************************
