- Original Message -
From: Matt Zimmerman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 01, 2004 8:33 PM
Subject: Re: apt-get upgrade and kernel images
On Fri, Feb 27, 2004 at 12:42:16AM -0800, Andris Kalnozols wrote:
I am running Debian testing and seem to recall
I think I recall something about debian not upgrading kernel-images
except if the user asks for it explicitly.
I have been using debian for many years and I can't recall that I ever
have gotten an kernel upgrade if I haven't asked for it. Sometimes I had
installed a kernel-2.4-386 kernel that was
On Tue, Mar 02, 2004 at 10:18:15AM +0200, Riku Valli wrote:
Yes, but for me was quite confusing that at first installation kernel isnot
a package.
AFAIK it will be, starting with sarge.
Marcin
--
Marcin Owsiany [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://marcin.owsiany.pl/
GnuPG: 1024D/60F41216
On Tue, Mar 02, 2004 at 10:28:44AM +0100, Mattias Eriksson wrote:
I think I recall something about debian not upgrading kernel-images
except if the user asks for it explicitly.
Not unless you explicitly put them on hold (which you are of course free to
do).
I have been using debian for many
On Tue, Mar 02, 2004 at 10:18:15AM +0200, Riku Valli wrote:
Yes, but for me was quite confusing that at first installation kernel isnot
a package. So if you install your Debian with boot floppies 2.4.18-bf2.4 you
never get update for this kernel. You must
apt-get install
Hi all!
I know that this list isn't the best place to ask, but I'm reding this
list for years. I hope You will forgive me :)
I'm looking for good linux (debian of course) based solution for VPN
connecting about 100 LANs. The solution should be stable, easy for
implementation and easy for
Jaroslaw Tabor wrote:
Hi all!
I know that this list isn't the best place to ask, but I'm reding this
list for years. I hope You will forgive me :)
I'm looking for good linux (debian of course) based solution for VPN
connecting about 100 LANs. The solution should be stable, easy for
On Tue, Mar 02, 2004 at 21:41:34 +0100, Jaroslaw Tabor wrote:
I've reviewed freeswan and OE feauture. This looks nice, but I'm afraid
about security.
If you're looking for a VPN solution, by all means look at FreeS/WAN (or its
likely successor, OpenSWAN). Just forget about OE. OE isn't about
On Tue, Mar 02, 2004 at 10:08:22PM +0100, J.H.M. Dassen (Ray) wrote:
On Tue, Mar 02, 2004 at 21:41:34 +0100, Jaroslaw Tabor wrote:
I've reviewed freeswan and OE feauture. This looks nice, but I'm afraid
about security.
If you're looking for a VPN solution, by all means look at FreeS/WAN
On Tue, Mar 02, 2004 at 10:00:58PM +0100, I.R. van Dongen wrote:
You might want to check tinc (http://tinc.nl.linux.org)
I strongly recommend *not* to use tinc.
http://www.securityfocus.com/archive/1/249142 illustrates that the
authors didn't have enough expertise to build a secure tool 2 years
Richard Atterer wrote:
On Tue, Mar 02, 2004 at 10:00:58PM +0100, I.R. van Dongen wrote:
You might want to check tinc (http://tinc.nl.linux.org)
I strongly recommend *not* to use tinc.
http://www.securityfocus.com/archive/1/249142 illustrates that the
authors didn't have enough expertise
On Wed, Mar 03, 2004 at 12:18:32AM +0100, I.R. van Dongen wrote:
Richard Atterer wrote:
On Tue, Mar 02, 2004 at 10:00:58PM +0100, I.R. van Dongen wrote:
You might want to check tinc (http://tinc.nl.linux.org)
I strongly recommend *not* to use tinc.
On Wed, Mar 03, 2004 at 12:18:32AM +0100, I.R. van Dongen wrote:
Richard Atterer wrote:
On Tue, Mar 02, 2004 at 10:00:58PM +0100, I.R. van Dongen wrote:
You might want to check tinc (http://tinc.nl.linux.org)
I strongly recommend *not* to use tinc.
On Tue, Mar 02, 2004 at 03:37:52PM -0600, Jacques Normand wrote:
On Tue, Mar 02, 2004 at 10:08:22PM +0100, J.H.M. Dassen (Ray) wrote:
If you're looking for a VPN solution, by all means look at FreeS/WAN (or its
likely successor, OpenSWAN). Just forget about OE. OE isn't about the type
of
Jan Minar wrote:
IMHO, the key words in Richard's posting are ``[not] enough expertise'',
and ``a track record''. The idea that the [conceptual] flaws will be
fixed in The Next Release [TM], although quite common amongst the
people, is a mere instance of a proof by wishful thinking. Clueless
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] you wrote:
I'm personally in favour of an IPsec VPN using openbsd or linux 2.6.
For a distributed Installation with up to 100 sites, I strongly recommend to go
with a small SOHO Router appliance. Because they are easy to replace with
UPS delivery, they are more
On Wed, Mar 03, 2004 at 01:33:17AM +0100, I.R. van Dongen wrote:
Jan Minar wrote:
IMHO, the key words in Richard's posting are ``[not] enough expertise'',
and ``a track record''. The idea that the [conceptual] flaws will be
fixed in The Next Release [TM], although quite common amongst the
On Wed, Mar 03, 2004 at 01:25:46 +0100, Milan P. Stanic wrote:
FreeS/WAN is orphaned upstream. OpenSWAN is based on FreeS/WAN and as
such it does not work with 2.6.
For Kernel's 2.6.0 and higher, Openswan uses the built in IPsec support.
Only the userland component of Openswan is required to
think an acceptable user-land alternative might be openvpn. I would
I don't think openvpn would easily handle such large number of connections,
it would be also a configuration nightmare.
tinc was designed to handle such scenario, but I wouldn't use anything
user-land for ~100 lans, no metter
FreeS/WAN is orphaned upstream. OpenSWAN is based on FreeS/WAN and as
such it does not work with 2.6.
That is untrue.
1.x branch works with 2.4.x kernels, 2.x branch works with 2.6.x
--
Dariush Pietrzak,
Key fingerprint = 40D0 9FFB 9939 7320 8294 05E0 BCC7 02C4 75CC 50D9
--
To
- Original Message -
From: Matt Zimmerman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: debian-security@lists.debian.org
Sent: Monday, March 01, 2004 8:33 PM
Subject: Re: apt-get upgrade and kernel images
On Fri, Feb 27, 2004 at 12:42:16AM -0800, Andris Kalnozols wrote:
I am running Debian testing and
I think I recall something about debian not upgrading kernel-images
except if the user asks for it explicitly.
I have been using debian for many years and I can't recall that I ever
have gotten an kernel upgrade if I haven't asked for it. Sometimes I had
installed a kernel-2.4-386 kernel that was
On Tue, Mar 02, 2004 at 10:18:15AM +0200, Riku Valli wrote:
Yes, but for me was quite confusing that at first installation kernel isnot
a package.
AFAIK it will be, starting with sarge.
Marcin
--
Marcin Owsiany [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://marcin.owsiany.pl/
GnuPG: 1024D/60F41216
On Tue, Mar 02, 2004 at 10:28:44AM +0100, Mattias Eriksson wrote:
I think I recall something about debian not upgrading kernel-images
except if the user asks for it explicitly.
Not unless you explicitly put them on hold (which you are of course free to
do).
I have been using debian for many
On Tue, Mar 02, 2004 at 10:18:15AM +0200, Riku Valli wrote:
Yes, but for me was quite confusing that at first installation kernel isnot
a package. So if you install your Debian with boot floppies 2.4.18-bf2.4 you
never get update for this kernel. You must
apt-get install
Hi all!
I know that this list isn't the best place to ask, but I'm reding this
list for years. I hope You will forgive me :)
I'm looking for good linux (debian of course) based solution for VPN
connecting about 100 LANs. The solution should be stable, easy for
implementation and easy for
Jaroslaw Tabor wrote:
Hi all!
I know that this list isn't the best place to ask, but I'm reding this
list for years. I hope You will forgive me :)
I'm looking for good linux (debian of course) based solution for VPN
connecting about 100 LANs. The solution should be stable, easy for
On Tue, Mar 02, 2004 at 21:41:34 +0100, Jaroslaw Tabor wrote:
I've reviewed freeswan and OE feauture. This looks nice, but I'm afraid
about security.
If you're looking for a VPN solution, by all means look at FreeS/WAN (or its
likely successor, OpenSWAN). Just forget about OE. OE isn't about
On Tue, Mar 02, 2004 at 10:08:22PM +0100, J.H.M. Dassen (Ray) wrote:
On Tue, Mar 02, 2004 at 21:41:34 +0100, Jaroslaw Tabor wrote:
I've reviewed freeswan and OE feauture. This looks nice, but I'm afraid
about security.
If you're looking for a VPN solution, by all means look at FreeS/WAN
On Tue, Mar 02, 2004 at 10:00:58PM +0100, I.R. van Dongen wrote:
You might want to check tinc (http://tinc.nl.linux.org)
I strongly recommend *not* to use tinc.
http://www.securityfocus.com/archive/1/249142 illustrates that the
authors didn't have enough expertise to build a secure tool 2 years
Richard Atterer wrote:
On Tue, Mar 02, 2004 at 10:00:58PM +0100, I.R. van Dongen wrote:
You might want to check tinc (http://tinc.nl.linux.org)
I strongly recommend *not* to use tinc.
http://www.securityfocus.com/archive/1/249142 illustrates that the
authors didn't have enough
On Wed, Mar 03, 2004 at 12:18:32AM +0100, I.R. van Dongen wrote:
Richard Atterer wrote:
On Tue, Mar 02, 2004 at 10:00:58PM +0100, I.R. van Dongen wrote:
You might want to check tinc (http://tinc.nl.linux.org)
I strongly recommend *not* to use tinc.
On Wed, Mar 03, 2004 at 12:18:32AM +0100, I.R. van Dongen wrote:
Richard Atterer wrote:
On Tue, Mar 02, 2004 at 10:00:58PM +0100, I.R. van Dongen wrote:
You might want to check tinc (http://tinc.nl.linux.org)
I strongly recommend *not* to use tinc.
On Tue, Mar 02, 2004 at 03:37:52PM -0600, Jacques Normand wrote:
On Tue, Mar 02, 2004 at 10:08:22PM +0100, J.H.M. Dassen (Ray) wrote:
If you're looking for a VPN solution, by all means look at FreeS/WAN (or its
likely successor, OpenSWAN). Just forget about OE. OE isn't about the type
of
Jan Minar wrote:
IMHO, the key words in Richard's posting are ``[not] enough expertise'',
and ``a track record''. The idea that the [conceptual] flaws will be
fixed in The Next Release [TM], although quite common amongst the
people, is a mere instance of a proof by wishful thinking. Clueless
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] you wrote:
I'm personally in favour of an IPsec VPN using openbsd or linux 2.6.
For a distributed Installation with up to 100 sites, I strongly recommend to go
with a small SOHO Router appliance. Because they are easy to replace with
UPS delivery, they are more
36 matches
Mail list logo
