When I turn it on
https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/networking/ip-sysctl.html I guess
it's IP_ Dynaddr - Boolean.
If set non-zero, enables support for dynamic addresses. If set to a
non-zero value larger than 1, a kernel log message will be printed when
dynamic address rewriting occurs.Default
On Sat 19 Dec 2020 at 19:04:40 (+), Brian wrote:
> On Sat 19 Dec 2020 at 09:43:02 +0100, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
> > On Sat, Dec 19, 2020 at 12:01:14AM +0100, deloptes wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > > Also I find very helpful the ArchLinux Wiki if I want to know how things
> > > work in general
On Wed 23 Dec 2020 at 20:15:59 (+0200), Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> On Mi, 23 dec 20, 11:48:31, David Wright wrote:
> >
> > Some sort of rough calculation between the expected/nominal bit rate
> > and the actual data rate achieved is certainly useful, if only to
> > ascertain whether the link itself i
On Wed 23 Dec 2020 at 20:31:09 (+0200), Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> On Mi, 23 dec 20, 18:28:43, Jesper Dybdal wrote:
> >
> > If a server is truly unattended, then it needs unattended-upgrades to
> > somehow manage to restart services that it has upgraded.
> > And if there are good reasons why these sp
--
Joseph Bryant Martin
USA 804 223-0325
Info Voice
804 334-4309
On 12/23/20 2:55 AM, mick crane wrote:
hello,
I have a buster PC and a bullseye PC which are both supposed to have
gigabyte network cards connected via a little Gigabyte switch box.
Transferring files between them, I forget which shows the transfer
speed per file, either scp or rsync the maxi
Buen día,
Le mandamos un cordial saludo, esperando que todo esté muy bien.
Nos comunicamos por este medio para comentarle que efectivamente como lo
anunció la OMS las pruebas de antígeno están cambiando la forma de detectar
posibles contagios de COVID-19 y salvando vidas al detectarse de maner
On Mi, 23 dec 20, 18:28:43, Jesper Dybdal wrote:
>
> If a server is truly unattended, then it needs unattended-upgrades to
> somehow manage to restart services that it has upgraded.
> And if there are good reasons why these specific services cannot simply be
> restarted directly by unattended-upgr
On Mi, 23 dec 20, 11:48:31, David Wright wrote:
>
> Some sort of rough calculation between the expected/nominal bit rate
> and the actual data rate achieved is certainly useful, if only to
> ascertain whether the link itself is performing well. For that, you
> need to reduce the amount of processi
On Wed 23 Dec 2020 at 16:47:21 (+0200), Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> On Mi, 23 dec 20, 10:56:36, Nicolas George wrote:
> > Andy Smith (12020-12-23):
> > > "gigabyte" is not a network speed. You probably mean gigabit
> >
> > No, gigabit is 10³ bits, there is no "per second" involved either.
> >
> > Any
On Thu, Dec 24, 2020 at 12:13:19AM +0800, Jeremy Ardley wrote:
Getting back to the original question, rsync is inherently slower
because both ends do deep file inspection and handshaking to decide
what data transfer is required. scp is usually faster.
If you're rsyncing to a non-existent desti
On 2020-12-22 15:34, David Wright wrote:
On Sun 20 Dec 2020 at 17:01:31 (+0100), Jesper Dybdal wrote:
On 2020-12-19 21:05, Kushal Kumaran wrote:
Jesper Dybdal wrote:
I run Buster with unattended updates configured to allow reboots.
Sometimes after an update, the log contains:
Service rest
Reco (12020-12-21):
> You're right. Xorg is a server, any window manager on top of it is
> merely an X client (a special one, but an interchangeable client).
> Wayland is not a server, it's a set of protocols. An implementation of
> these protocols inherently provides a set of functions that are pr
On 23/12/20 11:51 pm, Michael Stone wrote:
On Wed, Dec 23, 2020 at 11:37:07PM +0800, Jeremy Ardley wrote:
I did some tests and found there was around a 10-20% difference in speed
between runs.
Yes, if you want more consistent numbers you'd need much larger test
file sizes; if the transfer i
Michael Stone (12020-12-23):
> No, network speeds are traditionally measured in bits because networks
> transferred data in bits and telcos dealt with bits, and they sold and
> billed bits. Computer internals were measured in bytes and words because
> they transferred data in bytes and words. Some
Andrei POPESCU (12020-12-23):
> I took that to mean the theoretical maximum.
Not just that. Network protocols have many layers, and each layers adds
overhead. The rates are given at the lowest level, sometimes ATM,
therefore the usable rate at the application levels are significantly
lower.
Regar
On Wed, Dec 23, 2020 at 11:37:07PM +0800, Jeremy Ardley wrote:
I did some tests and found there was around a 10-20% difference in speed
between runs.
Yes, if you want more consistent numbers you'd need much larger test
file sizes; if the transfer is taking less than a second there's a lot
of
On 23/12/20 11:03 pm, Michael Stone wrote:
On Wed, Dec 23, 2020 at 09:56:01AM +0800, Jeremy Ardley wrote:
Having said that, scp and ssh are affected by the encryption
algorithm. The
fastest one at the moment is blowfish and it's possible to get up to
50 MB/s on
a gig lan.
That's pretty anci
On Wed, Dec 23, 2020 at 10:56:36AM +0100, Nicolas George wrote:
Anyway, why would anybody honest want to use this kind of unit to
measure an actual speed is beyond me. The only point to speak in
kilo/mega/gigabits per second instead is to make the numbers seem larger
to attract clueless customers
On Wed, Dec 23, 2020 at 09:56:01AM +0800, Jeremy Ardley wrote:
Having said that, scp and ssh are affected by the encryption algorithm. The
fastest one at the moment is blowfish and it's possible to get up to 50 MB/s on
a gig lan.
That's pretty ancient advice. The fastest on most modern x86 CPUs
zhang yang wrote:
> When I write a raw socket to send packets in Linux C, it shows:
> WARNNING:The current server does not support IP spoofing.
> How to set up debian8 system to use this function
1. Read
https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/networking/ip-sysctl.html
2. Install a Debian 10 (sta
On Mi, 23 dec 20, 10:56:36, Nicolas George wrote:
> Andy Smith (12020-12-23):
> > "gigabyte" is not a network speed. You probably mean gigabit
>
> No, gigabit is 10³ bits, there is no "per second" involved either.
>
> Anyway, why would anybody honest want to use this kind of unit to
> measure an
When I write a raw socket to send packets in Linux C, it shows:
WARNNING:The current server does not support IP spoofing.
How to set up debian8 system to use this function
On Ma, 22 dec 20, 12:11:19, rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>* or if: "you simply forget your password" -- it seems unlikely that
> you'll
> forget the "normal" password (the one you most often use) but remember a
> backup password (although maybe you'd use something really easy to remember
>
Andy Smith wrote:
> Hi Mick,
>
> On Wed, Dec 23, 2020 at 12:55:58AM +, mick crane wrote:
>> I have a buster PC and a bullseye PC which are both supposed to have
>> gigabyte network cards connected via a little Gigabyte switch box.
>
> "gigabyte" is not a network speed. You probably mean giga
On Wed, Dec 23, 2020 at 07:19:36AM +, mick crane wrote:
> On 2020-12-23 03:37, Andy Smith wrote:
> <..>
> >e.g. if you install a drive and it shows up in your OS as /dev/foo
> >of size 1TB, then:
> >
> ># pvcreate /dev/foo
> ># vgcreate myvg /dev/foo
> >
> >Now you have a volume group called "m
Andy Smith (12020-12-23):
> "gigabyte" is not a network speed. You probably mean gigabit
No, gigabit is 10³ bits, there is no "per second" involved either.
Anyway, why would anybody honest want to use this kind of unit to
measure an actual speed is beyond me. The only point to speak in
kilo/mega/
27 matches
Mail list logo
