Quoting tito via Dng (dng@lists.dyne.org):
> Hi,
> can this opennic.cache file be downloaded freely or do you need
> to register?
As mentioned, I have not experimented with alternative DNS roots in decades.
I could try to answer your question for you, but, seriously, if you are
going to start
Quoting tito via Dng (dng@lists.dyne.org):
> Hi,
> just for fast information, is it enough for unbound to remove:
>
> forward-zone:
> #forward-first: yes
> name: "."
> forward-tls-upstream: yes
> forward-addr: 1.1.1.1@853#cloudflare-dns.com
> forward-addr:
On Tue, 9 Mar 2021 22:02:47 -0800
Rick Moen wrote:
> Quoting Steve Litt (sl...@troubleshooters.com):
>
> > When I added four opennic root servers to my unbound's root.hints
>
> {laughs}
>
> Oh, you sweet summer child. Experimenting with alternative DNS roots,
> eh?
>
> It's been decades
On Tue, 9 Mar 2021 22:26:29 -0800
Rick Moen wrote:
> Quoting Gabe Stanton via Dng (dng@lists.dyne.org):
>
> > In the absence of a "community of dns server operators and users",
> > is the optimal option to have everyone run their own recursive
> > server? But then the upstream servers still get
Quoting Gabe Stanton via Dng (dng@lists.dyne.org):
> In the absence of a "community of dns server operators and users", is
> the optimal option to have everyone run their own recursive server? But
> then the upstream servers still get the birds-eye view and will very
> likely abuse that
Wirelessduck wrote:
>What’s the consensus on Quad9?
Didn't The Temptations do that in 1969?
SteveT
Steve Litt
Spring 2021 featured book: Troubleshooting Techniques of the Successful
Technologist http://www.troubleshooters.com/techniques
___
Dng
Quoting wirelessduck--- via Dng (dng@lists.dyne.org):
> What’s the consensus on Quad9? Are they any better from a privacy
> standpoint?
To say again, why outsource recursive nameservice to _anyone_?
You seem like a large number of people who are weirdly resistant to
the notion of basic control
Quoting Dimitris via Dng (dng@lists.dyne.org):
> so, i would be interested to know, if there's a privacy issue with
> opennnic?
I have no problem with people who decide to adopt alternate roots.
What I was talking about upthread was outsourcing one's recursive
nameservice to OpenNIC's public
Quoting Steve Litt (sl...@troubleshooters.com):
> When I added four opennic root servers to my unbound's root.hints
{laughs}
Oh, you sweet summer child. Experimenting with alternative DNS roots,
eh?
It's been decades since I've done so, but ISTR that the correct way to
do that is to re-point
On Tue, 09 Mar 2021 23:02:11 +
g4sra via Dng wrote:
> ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
> On Tuesday, March 9, 2021 4:00 PM, Florian Zieboll via Dng
> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 09 Mar 2021 14:18:34 +
> > g4sra via Dng dng@lists.dyne.org wrote:
> >
>
> > > The meeting being hosted on the
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Tuesday, March 9, 2021 4:00 PM, Florian Zieboll via Dng
wrote:
> On Tue, 09 Mar 2021 14:18:34 +
> g4sra via Dng dng@lists.dyne.org wrote:
>
> > The meeting being hosted on the server needs to be simultaneously
> > accessible as two different domains,
In der Nachricht vom Saturday, 6 March 2021 19:16:13 CET schrieb fsmithred via
Dng:
> I could not reproduce the problem on a system that boots legacy bios and
> uses grub-pc.
...my machine where it happened is a Legacy-BIOS-MBR-Installation.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally
On Sun, 7 Mar 2021 09:50:53 -0500
Steve Litt wrote among other things:
|Likewise, when I used Ubuntu, I wanted to get rid of Plymouth, which
|in my opinion is eye-candy for Windows Weenies. I tried and failed
|with package-manager-fu. I tried and failed with several other
|approaches. Finally I
> On 3/4/21 11:08 PM, wirelessduck--- via Dng wrote:
>>>
>>> And now the question. Has anyone reported the error in Devuan? Has
>>> anyone haved this problem?
>>
>> Seems to be a bit of news about the latest update.
>>
On Tue, 09 Mar 2021 14:18:34 +
g4sra via Dng wrote:
> The meeting being hosted on the server needs to be simultaneously
> accessible as two different domains, internal.com and external.com.
>
> Anyone achieved this yet or know a better way ?
Not sure if "better", but works for me: I
The meeting being hosted on the server needs to be simultaneously accessible as
two different domains, internal.com and external.com.
Anyone achieved this yet or know a better way ?
publickey - g4sra@protonmail.com - 0x42E94623.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys
signature.asc
Description:
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Tuesday, March 9, 2021 1:00 PM, al3xu5 wrote:
> Mon, 08 Mar 2021 22:01:53 + - g4sra g4...@protonmail.com:
>
> > It turns out 80 of the issue was a syntax error in the ALSA
> > configuration. For an unknown reason this mostly only caused an issue
> > for
Mon, 08 Mar 2021 22:01:53 + - g4sra :
> It turns out 80 of the issue was a syntax error in the ALSA
> configuration. For an unknown reason this mostly only caused an issue
> for web browsers. In fact I only detected it when running some third
> party alsa software that displayed a warning.
18 matches
Mail list logo
