From: Kent Borg [mailto:kentb...@borg.org]
Logically, if the crypto is good, entropy accounting should not matter,
That's not true. Take for example, Fortuna. Bruce Schneier says (I paraphrase
because I don't have the book in front of me right now) The way we eliminate
problems with
Guys,
I'm setting up a small network at work behind my own firewall. Typically
I would use a 192.168.1.0/24 network but I'm afraid the IT people at
work have used that for something in my work LAN environment. Is there a
way of probing the work LAN network to ensure that what ever IP address
I
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 04:04:12PM -0400, Stephen Adler wrote:
Guys,
I'm setting up a small network at work behind my own firewall. Typically
I would use a 192.168.1.0/24 network but I'm afraid the IT people at
work have used that for something in my work LAN environment. Is there a
way of
You could always set up an IPv6 subnet, tunneled via Hurricane Electric or
SixXS. You'd be guaranteed that the subnet the tunnel broker assigns to you
won't conflict with your company's subnets.
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 4:04 PM, Stephen Adler ad...@stephenadler.com
wrote:
Guys,
I'm setting
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 04:04:12PM -0400, Stephen Adler wrote:
Guys,
I'm setting up a small network at work behind my own firewall. Typically
I would use a 192.168.1.0/24 network but I'm afraid the IT people at
work have used that for something in my work LAN environment. Is there a
way of
If you are running your own firewall you could also NAT to the corporate
network if you can not get a specific subnet.
On Sep 10, 2014 4:28 PM, Chuck Anderson c...@wpi.edu wrote:
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 04:04:12PM -0400, Stephen Adler wrote:
Guys,
I'm setting up a small network at work
On 9/10/2014 4:04 PM, Stephen Adler wrote:
Guys,
I'm setting up a small network at work behind my own firewall. Typically
I would use a 192.168.1.0/24 network but I'm afraid the IT people at
work have used that for something in my work LAN environment. Is there a
way of probing the work LAN
On 9/10/2014 6:22 PM, Jason Normand wrote:
If you are running your own firewall you could also NAT to the corporate
network if you can not get a specific subnet.
This is the worst possible thing to do from a technical perspective.
Double NAT is bad for a variety of reasons.
The correct
Hi,
which company do you recommend that would provide support for Debian ?
This is to be used in (single/dual) server (x86_64), development
desktops (x86_64) and product embedded systems (x86 / x86_64 / ARM) for
a multi-national (my employer) with HQ in the US.
The only
That seems to be the guiding philosophy of the Gnome3 development team:
throw away and rewrite anything in Linux that's mature and robust, because
it doesn't have that new car smell!
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 10:14 PM, Tom Metro tmetro+...@gmail.com wrote:
http://www.infoworld.com/print/248950
I just finished upgrading to rhel 7 which is based on systemd and it was
the first time
I really paid attention to it. (With my fedora installs, I've basically
done the most minimal
configuration and having to work with systemd was done only on as
totally need basis.)
At first it seems dumb
Stephen Adler wrote:
...it's actually
quite good, in my opinion. It makes it possible to boot your system much
faster by bringing up
services in parallel.
I haven't looked at how systemd is implemented yet, much less lived with
it, but one thing that caught my eye in the article was the
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 06:59:51PM -0400, Bill Horne wrote:
If by Firewall you mean Network Address Translation-enabled
wired-only router, then it's a non issue. You plug the WAN port
into your corporate network and set it for DHCP (or whatever fixed
address your IT guys assigned to the port).
13 matches
Mail list logo
