subscribe
Re: Can I do 4-26 snapshot to 6.9-stable safely?
Use the fastly mirror, or download the files to a usb stick and select "disk" at the prompt. once you go current you can't go back, and its very clearly said in the FAQ as ashton said On Sat May 1, 2021 at 6:25 PM CST, Luke Small wrote: > I tried that by the way. I even mv’ed my pf.conf to nullify it and > tried > and it couldn’t download from the gigenet mirror which absolutely has > the > 6.9 files. It didn’t work at all. Sysupgrade really needs to be able > to be > working on versions as well as -r and -s! The program isn’t > intelligent > enough. > > On Sat, May 1, 2021 at 5:26 PM jpeg bild wrote: > > > If you want to move back to stable, you would have to boot bsd.rd and > > select "Upgrade" in the prompt, then install from http with the correct > > path for 6.9-stable > > > > On Fri Apr 30, 2021 at 9:49 PM CST, Luke Small wrote: > > > We’re there major irreversible changes made to the following snapshot: > > > > > > kern.version=OpenBSD 6.9-current (GENERIC.MP) #479: Mon Apr 26 02:26:53 > > > MDT > > > 2021 > > > > > > which would render in incapable of a downgrade? > > > -- > > > -Luke > > > > -- > -Luke
Re: Can I do 4-26 snapshot to 6.9-stable safely?
worked fine for me, its basically just reinstalling but with the same configuration as your last install On Sat May 1, 2021 at 6:42 PM CST, Ashton Fagg wrote: > > > On May 1, 2021, at 18:38, jpeg bild wrote: > > > > If you want to move back to stable, you would have to boot bsd.rd and > > select "Upgrade" in the prompt, then install from http with the correct > > path for 6.9-stable > > …except that’s not supported. > > Again, per the very first sentence: > > https://www.openbsd.org/faq/upgrade69.html
Re: Can I do 4-26 snapshot to 6.9-stable safely?
If you want to move back to stable, you would have to boot bsd.rd and select "Upgrade" in the prompt, then install from http with the correct path for 6.9-stable On Fri Apr 30, 2021 at 9:49 PM CST, Luke Small wrote: > We’re there major irreversible changes made to the following snapshot: > > kern.version=OpenBSD 6.9-current (GENERIC.MP) #479: Mon Apr 26 02:26:53 > MDT > 2021 > > which would render in incapable of a downgrade? > -- > -Luke
Re: Can I do 4-26 snapshot to 6.9-stable safely?
I would do that, but I’ll have to figure out how to manually mount my encrypted partition, which sysupgrade and bsd.rd takes care if for me automatically. On Sat, May 1, 2021 at 8:07 PM jpeg bild wrote: > Use the fastly mirror, or download the files to a usb stick and select > "disk" at the prompt. once you go current you can't go back, and its > very clearly said in the FAQ as ashton said > > On Sat May 1, 2021 at 6:25 PM CST, Luke Small wrote: > > I tried that by the way. I even mv’ed my pf.conf to nullify it and > > tried > > and it couldn’t download from the gigenet mirror which absolutely has > > the > > 6.9 files. It didn’t work at all. Sysupgrade really needs to be able > > to be > > working on versions as well as -r and -s! The program isn’t > > intelligent > > enough. > > > > On Sat, May 1, 2021 at 5:26 PM jpeg bild wrote: > > > > > If you want to move back to stable, you would have to boot bsd.rd and > > > select "Upgrade" in the prompt, then install from http with the correct > > > path for 6.9-stable > > > > > > On Fri Apr 30, 2021 at 9:49 PM CST, Luke Small wrote: > > > > We’re there major irreversible changes made to the following > snapshot: > > > > > > > > kern.version=OpenBSD 6.9-current (GENERIC.MP) #479: Mon Apr 26 > 02:26:53 > > > > MDT > > > > 2021 > > > > > > > > which would render in incapable of a downgrade? > > > > -- > > > > -Luke > > > > > > -- > > -Luke > > -- -Luke
Re: Can I do 4-26 snapshot to 6.9-stable safely?
I thought I’d be nice and try the beta to help out, but if the ramdisk doesn’t even work anymore like it has in the past for me, I’m just going from 6.9-current to 7.0-stable and never looking back at trying current anymore. I could try sysupgrade -n and download the requisite 6.9-release files to replace them, but I’m too worried it’d be messed in some way and brick my machine. I have a simple network setup of google fiber with a modem/router at 196.168.1.1 which the default pf.conf should work instead of my pretty complicated (for a home network) pf.conf . I have no clue why the bsd.rd doesn’t work anymore…unless the dhclient.conf which I’ve told to listen to localhost for unbound and dnscrypt-proxy is gumming things up. I sure wish sysupgrade was more reasonable. Even pkg_add permits “downgrade” On Sat, May 1, 2021 at 7:51 PM Theo de Raadt wrote: > The FAQ speaks to this matter. > > Noone else has anything more to say. > > Please stop begging for personal handholding, everyone is getting > embarrassed. > > > > Luke Small wrote: > > > I tried that by the way. I even mv’ed my pf.conf to nullify it and tried > > and it couldn’t download from the gigenet mirror which absolutely has the > > 6.9 files. It didn’t work at all. Sysupgrade really needs to be able to > be > > working on versions as well as -r and -s! The program isn’t intelligent > > enough. > > > > On Sat, May 1, 2021 at 5:26 PM jpeg bild wrote: > > > > > If you want to move back to stable, you would have to boot bsd.rd and > > > select "Upgrade" in the prompt, then install from http with the correct > > > path for 6.9-stable > > > > > > On Fri Apr 30, 2021 at 9:49 PM CST, Luke Small wrote: > > > > We’re there major irreversible changes made to the following > snapshot: > > > > > > > > kern.version=OpenBSD 6.9-current (GENERIC.MP) #479: Mon Apr 26 > 02:26:53 > > > > MDT > > > > 2021 > > > > > > > > which would render in incapable of a downgrade? > > > > -- > > > > -Luke > > > > > > -- > > -Luke > -- -Luke
Re: Can I do 4-26 snapshot to 6.9-stable safely?
The FAQ speaks to this matter. Noone else has anything more to say. Please stop begging for personal handholding, everyone is getting embarrassed. Luke Small wrote: > I tried that by the way. I even mv’ed my pf.conf to nullify it and tried > and it couldn’t download from the gigenet mirror which absolutely has the > 6.9 files. It didn’t work at all. Sysupgrade really needs to be able to be > working on versions as well as -r and -s! The program isn’t intelligent > enough. > > On Sat, May 1, 2021 at 5:26 PM jpeg bild wrote: > > > If you want to move back to stable, you would have to boot bsd.rd and > > select "Upgrade" in the prompt, then install from http with the correct > > path for 6.9-stable > > > > On Fri Apr 30, 2021 at 9:49 PM CST, Luke Small wrote: > > > We’re there major irreversible changes made to the following snapshot: > > > > > > kern.version=OpenBSD 6.9-current (GENERIC.MP) #479: Mon Apr 26 02:26:53 > > > MDT > > > 2021 > > > > > > which would render in incapable of a downgrade? > > > -- > > > -Luke > > > > -- > -Luke
Re: Can I do 4-26 snapshot to 6.9-stable safely?
> On May 1, 2021, at 18:38, jpeg bild wrote: > > If you want to move back to stable, you would have to boot bsd.rd and > select "Upgrade" in the prompt, then install from http with the correct > path for 6.9-stable …except that’s not supported. Again, per the very first sentence: https://www.openbsd.org/faq/upgrade69.html
Re: Can I do 4-26 snapshot to 6.9-stable safely?
I tried that by the way. I even mv’ed my pf.conf to nullify it and tried and it couldn’t download from the gigenet mirror which absolutely has the 6.9 files. It didn’t work at all. Sysupgrade really needs to be able to be working on versions as well as -r and -s! The program isn’t intelligent enough. On Sat, May 1, 2021 at 5:26 PM jpeg bild wrote: > If you want to move back to stable, you would have to boot bsd.rd and > select "Upgrade" in the prompt, then install from http with the correct > path for 6.9-stable > > On Fri Apr 30, 2021 at 9:49 PM CST, Luke Small wrote: > > We’re there major irreversible changes made to the following snapshot: > > > > kern.version=OpenBSD 6.9-current (GENERIC.MP) #479: Mon Apr 26 02:26:53 > > MDT > > 2021 > > > > which would render in incapable of a downgrade? > > -- > > -Luke > > -- -Luke
Re: BGP circular routing
On Thu, 29 Apr 2021 12:04:53 - (UTC)
Stuart Henderson wrote:
> On 2021-04-29, Marko Cupać wrote:
> > (...)
> > I have a problem with circular routing on a site which talks
> > BGP with two upstream providers, with traffic to site which has
> > static default route over third ISP:
> >
> > --> ISP1 --> ISP3 -->
> > SITEASITEB
> > <-- ISP2 <-- ISP3 <--
>
> Asymmetric routing (circular suggest that it's looping so you have
> no working connecticity, which I tuink ks not what you're describing).
Yes, thank you for the correction.
> > I tried to prepend self / neighbor to ISP2 - no change (ISP1 has
> > best routes for 99% of the prefixes, including to SITEB). I
> > contacted ISP2, they said the problem is with ISP3. I contacted
> > ISP3, they said ISP2 announces my prefix (they're my LIR) so the
> > best route is over them. I contacted ISP2 again, they said they
> > prepended my prefix to ISP3, but situation is the same.
> >
> > Is it OK for ISP2 (my LIR) to announce and prepend my prefix? I
> > thought I should be in control of that.
> >
> > Is there anything I can do about the situation?
>
> You can't do much to control incoming traffic though you can sometimes
> influence it. But you do control which routes you accept/prefer. If
> you want to avoid the assymetric path, you need to prefer ISP2's
> announcwments for SITEB, for example you could match and give it a
> higher localpref.
That was really helpful suggestion. I increased SITEB's localpref:
match from $ISP2 prefix { A.B.C.D/E } set localpref 200
...and I ended up sending and receiving traffic to SITEB through the
same interface over ISP2. This is even better because link over ISP2
until now had almost no outgoing traffic, while the one over ISP1 was
heavily utilized.
> Is it causing a problem though? This is completely normal and expected
> on the internet.
I was seeing quite a number of state-mismatch packets in SITEB's PF
info, which is the reason why I wanted to make traffic come and go
through same interface on SITEA. Traffic between the sites is ipsec
protected GRE tunnel, so isakmpd (udp) and esp. I suspect
state-mismatch was due to slight difference in latency of links.
It is to early to say that for sure, but I think I am noticing much
less state-mismatch packets in SITEB's PF info since the change.
Thanks!
--
Before enlightenment - chop wood, draw water.
After enlightenment - chop wood, draw water.
Marko Cupać
https://www.mimar.rs/
Re: AUTOCONF4 flag
Thanks for clearing this up. Peter On 5/1/21 5:08 PM, Theo de Raadt wrote: Peter Wens wrote: Hi, In OpenSBD 6.9 the AUTOCONF4 flag is not set with 'dhcp' set in hostname.if (from fresh install) You have described this incorrectly. In 6.8, choosing "dhcp" would run dhclient(8) in that interfaces, and dhclient would set the AUTOCONF4 flag. That was incorrect. AUTOCONF4 is supposed to work like AUTOCONF6. These are per-interface flags which indicate a request: "Someone please go get us a dynamic address". dhclient incorrectly believed the flag meant "I have gotten a dynamic address" If 'autoconf' instead of 'dhcp' is used with dhcpleased the flag is set. Is this intentional in 6.9? Yes, it is intentional. In 6.9: 1) 'autoconf' is to instruct dhcpleased(8), to do dhcp lease-learning, then dhcpleased(8) will communicate learned DNS configuration via route-socket to resolvd(8), which will make changes to /etc/resolv.conf 2) 'dhcp' runs a per-interface dhclient(8) which will manage /etc/resolv.conf The two dhcp modes of operation are incompatible. By 7.0 we hope to switch to the model described in (1), because this allows resolvd(8) to blend DNS configuration from multiple sources into /etc/resolv.conf, rather than havine one per-interface daemon smashing the file.
Re: aggr not load balancing
> On Apr 29, 2021, at 9:13 AM, Steven Surdock > wrote: > > I switched from trunk to aggr on a "OpenBSD 6.8 GENERIC.MP#5 amd64" and it > isn't load balancing across the two configured links. The remote side is a > Cisco ASR9k with the same configuration. Is that expected? > > Hi, try 6.9. There is a bugfix to pf that I found also corrects load balancing with aggr. Brian
Re: default umask 0077?
One possible correction: login.conf might be a better place than what I suggested earlier. Either way, would require thinking through it by someone more knowledgeable. On 2021-05-01 09:37:51-0600, Luke A. Call wrote: > I have been wondering for a long time (and did some searches) if it > would make sense for obsd to have a default umask of 0077, in the > /etc/profile or /etc/skel files on new installs, or what I'm missing. > > I imagine it helping a new user who hasn't learned yet about umask, to > not create files readable by all other users, until ready for > that, thus being even more secure by default. Maybe the default > permissions on new home directories already covers that issue? Yet > there are possible files in the /tmp folder; I don't know in all cases > which is why I set my own system with 0077. > > I've been running that way and the only problem I've noticed (so far) is > in some uses of pkg_add I had to set the umask back to 0022 first and > reset it after, for some things to work, which I did in a wrapper script. > > Most likely it's just about my ignorance. Thanks. > > ps: thanks for 6.9 etc!
Re: Can I do 4-26 snapshot to 6.9-stable safely?
Carson Chittom wrote: > On Sat, May 1, 2021, at 1:14 PM, Luke Small wrote: > > I google searched: “site:openbsd.org (snapshot OR current) (stable OR > > release) faq” > > > > and found no results which speaks of minor downgrades. > > > > Also, “sysupgrade -r” defaults to 7.0 when trying to upgrade from previous > > 6.9 snapshots to release. Is it intended to require folks to use bsd.rd (or > > use an iso) to make that change? > > See the very first sentence on this page: > https://www.openbsd.org/faq/upgrade69.html No kidding.
Re: Can I do 4-26 snapshot to 6.9-stable safely?
On Sat, May 1, 2021, at 1:14 PM, Luke Small wrote: > I google searched: “site:openbsd.org (snapshot OR current) (stable OR > release) faq” > > and found no results which speaks of minor downgrades. > > Also, “sysupgrade -r” defaults to 7.0 when trying to upgrade from previous > 6.9 snapshots to release. Is it intended to require folks to use bsd.rd (or > use an iso) to make that change? See the very first sentence on this page: https://www.openbsd.org/faq/upgrade69.html
Re: Can I do 4-26 snapshot to 6.9-stable safely?
I google searched: “site:openbsd.org (snapshot OR current) (stable OR release) faq” and found no results which speaks of minor downgrades. Also, “sysupgrade -r” defaults to 7.0 when trying to upgrade from previous 6.9 snapshots to release. Is it intended to require folks to use bsd.rd (or use an iso) to make that change? On Fri, Apr 30, 2021 at 11:01 PM Theo de Raadt wrote: > Luke Small wrote: > > > We’re there major irreversible changes made to the following snapshot: > > > > kern.version=OpenBSD 6.9-current (GENERIC.MP) #479: Mon Apr 26 02:26:53 > MDT > > 2021 > > > > which would render in incapable of a downgrade? > > The FAQ has a clear & simple answer to that question, and it is our > belief that noone deserves an independently decided answer on a > case-by-case basis. Basically, stop wasting our time. > > -- -Luke
Re:
Hi, you need to recreate, unfortunately. This has been discussed before, if you search the archives for my email address you will find the discussion :) On Sat, May 01, 2021 at 01:39:58PM +0300, Irshad Sulaiman wrote: Hi is it possible to change from passphrase to key disk in bictl (8) , or do I need to recreate whole RAID again Thank you Etchers
default umask 0077?
I have been wondering for a long time (and did some searches) if it would make sense for obsd to have a default umask of 0077, in the /etc/profile or /etc/skel files on new installs, or what I'm missing. I imagine it helping a new user who hasn't learned yet about umask, to not create files readable by all other users, until ready for that, thus being even more secure by default. Maybe the default permissions on new home directories already covers that issue? Yet there are possible files in the /tmp folder; I don't know in all cases which is why I set my own system with 0077. I've been running that way and the only problem I've noticed (so far) is in some uses of pkg_add I had to set the umask back to 0022 first and reset it after, for some things to work, which I did in a wrapper script. Most likely it's just about my ignorance. Thanks. ps: thanks for 6.9 etc!
Re: AUTOCONF4 flag
Peter Wens wrote: > Hi, > > In OpenSBD 6.9 the AUTOCONF4 flag is not set > with 'dhcp' set in hostname.if (from fresh install) You have described this incorrectly. In 6.8, choosing "dhcp" would run dhclient(8) in that interfaces, and dhclient would set the AUTOCONF4 flag. That was incorrect. AUTOCONF4 is supposed to work like AUTOCONF6. These are per-interface flags which indicate a request: "Someone please go get us a dynamic address". dhclient incorrectly believed the flag meant "I have gotten a dynamic address" > If 'autoconf' instead of 'dhcp' is used with dhcpleased > the flag is set. > > Is this intentional in 6.9? Yes, it is intentional. In 6.9: 1) 'autoconf' is to instruct dhcpleased(8), to do dhcp lease-learning, then dhcpleased(8) will communicate learned DNS configuration via route-socket to resolvd(8), which will make changes to /etc/resolv.conf 2) 'dhcp' runs a per-interface dhclient(8) which will manage /etc/resolv.conf The two dhcp modes of operation are incompatible. By 7.0 we hope to switch to the model described in (1), because this allows resolvd(8) to blend DNS configuration from multiple sources into /etc/resolv.conf, rather than havine one per-interface daemon smashing the file.
AUTOCONF4 flag
Hi, In OpenSBD 6.9 the AUTOCONF4 flag is not set with 'dhcp' set in hostname.if (from fresh install) If 'autoconf' instead of 'dhcp' is used with dhcpleased the flag is set. Is this intentional in 6.9? Best regards, Peter
[no subject]
Hi is it possible to change from passphrase to key disk in bictl (8) , or do I need to recreate whole RAID again Thank you Etchers
Re: OpenBSD 6.9
Love song and theme, no lyrics for this one. Jean-François Le 01/05/2021 à 12:49, Oliver Marugg a écrit : Hi @Developers: Many thanks for this new release. @all others and me: Before upgrading your boxes, this is a good moment to donate some bucks to this project again. Have a smooth upgrade. -oliver
OpenBSD 6.9
Hi @Developers: Many thanks for this new release. @all others and me: Before upgrading your boxes, this is a good moment to donate some bucks to this project again. Have a smooth upgrade. -oliver
