Hi,
I do have one fileserver, which is compared to other systems slow when
transferring file through the lan.
The test I did get a transfer speed of about 70 - 80 MB/s. I copy files
by rsync or scp from a SSD disk to the servers ISCSI Storage and I
tested to copy to a serverside RAM disk.
I
On 08/21/2012 08:54 AM, Götz Reinicke wrote:
The test I did get a transfer speed of about 70 - 80 MB/s. I copy files
by rsync or scp from a SSD disk to the servers ISCSI Storage and I
tested to copy to a serverside RAM disk.
What does top say on the server when you're copying?
Mogens
--
Am 21.08.12 09:14, schrieb Mogens Kjaer:
On 08/21/2012 08:54 AM, Götz Reinicke wrote:
The test I did get a transfer speed of about 70 - 80 MB/s. I copy files
by rsync or scp from a SSD disk to the servers ISCSI Storage and I
tested to copy to a serverside RAM disk.
What does top say on the
On 08/21/2012 09:30 AM, Götz Reinicke wrote:
564 root 20 0 98.5m 6872 2968 R 99.0 0.2 1:08.10 sshd
It looks like ssh is the rate limiting step in your rsync.
What cipher are you using for ssh?
I use
rsync --rsh='/usr/bin/ssh -c arcfour128' ...
that helps quite a bit on my hardware,
Am 21.08.12 09:37, schrieb Mogens Kjaer:
On 08/21/2012 09:30 AM, Götz Reinicke wrote:
564 root 20 0 98.5m 6872 2968 R 99.0 0.2 1:08.10 sshd
It looks like ssh is the rate limiting step in your rsync.
What cipher are you using for ssh?
I use
rsync --rsh='/usr/bin/ssh -c
Hi,
I installed proftpd from Centos repository to my Centos 6.3 server.
Iptables and selinux are off; I do have one unix user which can ssh and
login to the server.
I do use the default config and cant login to the ftp server (home
directory of that user is all I want) :/
I use filezilla and
The shell of the approp user not defined in /etc/shells?
The user in /etc/ftpusers to deny access?
The ftp server not started?
...
suomi
On 2012-08-21 11:29, Götz Reinicke wrote:
Hi,
I installed proftpd from Centos repository to my Centos 6.3 server.
Iptables and selinux are off; I do have
Hi,
On 08/21/2012 10:29 AM, Götz Reinicke wrote:
I installed proftpd from Centos repository to my Centos 6.3 server.
CentOS does not ship proftpd - so you might want to check where you got
it from.
can be wrong? Or what may I have to change?
look at the log files on the server to see what is
Am 21.08.12 11:39, schrieb anax:
The shell of the approp user not defined in /etc/shells?
It is, login by ssh uses that shell.
The user in /etc/ftpusers to deny access?
nop
The ftp server not started?
it is started
...
suomi
On 2012-08-21 11:29, Götz Reinicke wrote:
Hi,
I
Am 21.08.12 11:41, schrieb Karanbir Singh:
Hi,
On 08/21/2012 10:29 AM, Götz Reinicke wrote:
I installed proftpd from Centos repository to my Centos 6.3 server.
CentOS does not ship proftpd - so you might want to check where you got
it from.
/(§ repositories; it's from rpmforge. Sorry.
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 11:46:45AM +0200, Götz Reinicke wrote:
Sorry for that much mail signature, but that's our company policy and
have to use it that way...
Post from another mail account, then? Signatures that long are rude to
those of us that don't really care about your corporate
Just FYI
I guess, you could also run your own CA and sign stuff yourself.
After all, your RPMs are also self-signed ;-)
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On Sat, Aug 18, 2012, Mihamina Rakotomandimby wrote:
On 08/16/2012 12:34 AM, Bill Campbell wrote:
Can somebody point me to a HowTO or other documentation describing the
tools available under the CentOS 5 KVM package to create and manage a
Windows 7 Pro VM? All my VM experience to date has been
Hi all.
I have an OpenVPN server:
2.2.1-1 x86_64
Server config:
port 11223
dev tap
proto udp
tls-server
ca keys/ca.crt
cert keys/server.crt
key keys/server.key
dh keys/dh1024.pem
server 1.2.3.3 255.255.255.0
push route 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 1.2.3.4
keepalive 10 60
client-to-client
Rafał Radecki wrote:
Hi all.
I have an OpenVPN server:
2.2.1-1 x86_64
snip
After successful start of openvpn service (Tue Aug 21 16:12:24 2012
us=644993 Initialization Sequence Completed in logfile) I have:
Client interface:
9: tap0: BROADCAST,MULTICAST mtu 1500 qdisc noop state DOWN qlen
From: Rainer Duffner rai...@ultra-secure.de
Just FYI
I guess, you could also run your own CA and sign stuff yourself.
After all, your RPMs are also self-signed ;-)
But that means the browsers will complain until each user permanently adds
this untrusted certificate manually... which might be
Am 21.08.2012 um 16:27 schrieb Rafał Radecki:
When I start the tunnel I am not able to ping 1.2.3.4 IP on server, the TAP
interface is also in DOWN state. I have no firewall configured. My client
log file is attached.
Should I have an IP addres on my TAP interface?
What are your goals?
A
On 8/21/2012 7:39 AM, John Doe wrote:
From: Rainer Duffner rai...@ultra-secure.de
Just FYI
I guess, you could also run your own CA and sign stuff yourself.
After all, your RPMs are also self-signed ;-)
But that means the browsers will complain until each user permanently adds
this
Startssl Wildcards require validation which is (i think) $59,90 per 2 years.
Now startssl simple certificates are $0, that's right :-)
Since i am StartCom-validated anyway i'd donate a 2-year SSL wildcard
certificate if the person in charge contacts me off-list. All i need i s a
CSR to submit and
On 21/08/2012 15:47, Greg Bailey wrote:
On 8/21/2012 7:39 AM, John Doe wrote:
From: Rainer Duffner rai...@ultra-secure.de
Just FYI
I guess, you could also run your own CA and sign stuff yourself.
After all, your RPMs are also self-signed ;-)
But that means the browsers will complain until
From: Greg Bailey gbai...@lxpro.com
On 8/21/2012 7:39 AM, John Doe wrote:
From: Rainer Duffner rai...@ultra-secure.de
Just FYI
I guess, you could also run your own CA and sign stuff yourself.
After all, your RPMs are also self-signed ;-)
But that means the browsers will complain until
John Doe wrote:
From: Greg Bailey gbai...@lxpro.com
On 8/21/2012 7:39 AM, John Doe wrote:
From: Rainer Duffner rai...@ultra-secure.de
Just FYI
I guess, you could also run your own CA and sign stuff yourself.
After all, your RPMs are also self-signed ;-)
But that means the browsers
On 08/21/2012 02:37 PM, Rainer Duffner wrote:
Just FYI
I guess, you could also run your own CA and sign stuff yourself.
After all, your RPMs are also self-signed ;-)
I'll get this fixed shortly.
--
Karanbir Singh
+44-207-0999389 | http://www.karan.org/ | twitter.com/kbsingh
ICQ: 2522219
Send CentOS-announce mailing list submissions to
centos-annou...@centos.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-announce
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
Just to be sure, have you tested on the machine to ping the interface?
i.e. give it an IP address in ifcfg-eth0, then ping the ip address locally?
Did you put another temporary PCI card into the system and tried that?
Jobst
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 12:59:11PM -0500, Tim Nelson
CentOS Errata and Bugfix Advisory 2012:1184
Upstream details at : http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2012-1184.html
The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently
syncing to the mirrors: ( sha256sum Filename )
i386:
CentOS Errata and Bugfix Advisory 2012:1188
Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2012-1188.html
The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently
syncing to the mirrors: ( sha256sum Filename )
i386:
CentOS Errata and Security Advisory 2012:1174 Low
Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2012-1174.html
The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently
syncing to the mirrors: ( sha256sum Filename )
i386:
28 matches
Mail list logo
