On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 01:06:11AM +, FreeBSD Tinderbox wrote:
> TB --- 2011-03-07 00:25:55 - tinderbox 2.6 running on
> freebsd-current.sentex.ca
> TB --- 2011-03-07 00:25:55 - starting HEAD tinderbox run for ia64/ia64
> TB --- 2011-03-07 00:25:55 - cleaning the object tree
> TB --- 2011-03-0
Which version of the driver are you using?
Adrian
2011/3/7 Vinícius Zavam
> 2011/1/23 Adrian Chadd :
> > You'll have to compile in the diag api.
> >
> > Just add these:
> >
> > options ATH_DIAGAPI
> >
> >
> >
> > Adrian
> >
> > 2011/1/23 Dima Panov :
> >> Hello!
> >>
> >> 23.01.2011,
TB --- 2011-03-07 00:25:55 - tinderbox 2.6 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2011-03-07 00:25:55 - starting HEAD tinderbox run for ia64/ia64
TB --- 2011-03-07 00:25:55 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2011-03-07 00:26:06 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2011-03-07 00:26:06 - /usr/bin/c
>
> On 7 March 2011 07:27, daren wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 2011-03-03 at 14:31 -0800, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > For those of you who are testing out my if_ath changes, I'd
> really
> > appreciate it if you'd update to -HE
Hello,
I'm running a 9-current server as compiled on Sat Mar 5 02:17:14
CET 2011.
Since I upgraded to ZFS v28 I noticed missing files from NFS. The
files are still accessible through NFS but they don't show up on a
readdir(3).
On the NFS server (files are stored on a ZFS v15 volume, not yet
upg
FreeBSD doesn't implement OFDM in the kernel.
The various chipsets implement OFDM, not FreeBSD.
There's no "software" OFDM. The 802.11 chipsets out there take care of it,
not FreeBSD.
Adrian
On 7 March 2011 04:42, Etienne Robillard wrote:
> On 06/03/11 12:36 PM, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
>
On 06/03/11 12:36 PM, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
> On Sunday 06 March 2011 18:19:31 Etienne Robillard wrote:
>
>> On 06/03/11 11:58 AM, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
>>
>
>> yes, the difference with 'software OFDM' and hardware OFDM - as in
>> run(4) - is the latter
>> exploits 'objects' an
Wiadomość napisana przez Steve Wills w dniu 2011-03-06, o godz. 19:27:
> On 03/06/11 12:49, Edward Tomasz Napierała wrote:
>>
>> The above looks like old-style, "canonical six" trivial ACL. Now,
>> cp(1) shouldn't even try to copy the ACL in this case, since there
>> is nothing to copy. So, for
On 7 March 2011 03:21, Ian FREISLICH wrote:
> Adrian Chadd wrote:
> > I'd like to establish at least a range of subversion revisions so we can
> > start binary searching which one(s) caused instabilities.
>
> Is this all the source?
>
> Old:
> $FreeBSD: src/sys/dev/ath/if_ath.c,v 1.300 2011/02/21
Adrian Chadd wrote:
> I'd like to establish at least a range of subversion revisions so we can
> start binary searching which one(s) caused instabilities.
Is this all the source?
Old:
$FreeBSD: src/sys/dev/ath/if_ath.c,v 1.300 2011/02/21 19:22:45 adrian Exp $
$FreeBSD: src/sys/dev/ath/if_ath_debu
On Mar 5, 2011, at 4:16 PM, Nerius Landys wrote:
> Anyhow, first things are first. I need to get CURRENT. So, what is
> the preferred way to get CURRENT on your system?
As mentioned, there are a lot of variations.
Personally, I bootstrap current systems by installing a
minimal STABLE distribu
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/06/11 12:49, Edward Tomasz Napierała wrote:
>
> The above looks like old-style, "canonical six" trivial ACL. Now,
> cp(1) shouldn't even try to copy the ACL in this case, since there
> is nothing to copy. So, for some reason, something failed
On 06/03/11 12:46 PM, Etienne Robillard wrote:
> On 06/03/11 12:36 PM, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
>
>> On Sunday 06 March 2011 18:19:31 Etienne Robillard wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On 06/03/11 11:58 AM, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>> yes, the difference with 'soft
2011/3/6 Ian FREISLICH :
> Adrian Chadd wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> For those of you who are testing out my if_ath changes, I'd really
>> appreciate it if you'd update to -HEAD and re-test.
>
> Since running the new code, I get a slew of these:
>
> Mar 6 14:41:53 mini wpa_supplicant[422]: Trying to as
Wiadomość napisana przez Steve Wills w dniu 2011-03-06, o godz. 15:43:
> On 03/06/11 08:35, Steve Wills wrote:
>> On 03/06/11 04:22, Edward Tomasz NapieraBa wrote:
>>> Wiadomo[ napisana przez Steve Wills w dniu 2011-03-06, o godz. 05:11:
>>
>>> [..]
>>
Thanks for your work on this, I'm very
On 06/03/11 12:36 PM, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
> On Sunday 06 March 2011 18:19:31 Etienne Robillard wrote:
>
>> On 06/03/11 11:58 AM, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
>>
>
>> yes, the difference with 'software OFDM' and hardware OFDM - as in
>> run(4) - is the latter
>> exploits 'objects' an
On Sunday 06 March 2011 18:19:31 Etienne Robillard wrote:
> On 06/03/11 11:58 AM, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
> yes, the difference with 'software OFDM' and hardware OFDM - as in
> run(4) - is the latter
> exploits 'objects' and 'peoples' as subcarriers units with
> "bi-directional data" when
> sof
On 06/03/11 11:58 AM, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
>> and finally I almost forgot...
>>
>> there seems to be another aspect of false security in OFDM design in
>> what bi-directional IIP packets could be transfered out-of-band using
>> ELF/VLF ranges
>> and reverse FFT functions..
>>
>
> My poi
On Sun, Mar 06, 2011 at 08:23:42AM -0800, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 06, 2011 at 11:06:09AM -0500, Steve Wills wrote:
> > On 03/06/11 10:37, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
> > >
> > > At first glance it looks like acl_set_fd_np(3) isn't working on an
> > > md-backed filesystem; specifically, it'
On 06/03/11 11:46 AM, David Wolfskill wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 06, 2011 at 11:31:00AM -0500, Etienne Robillard wrote:
>
>> On 06/03/11 09:49 AM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
>>
>>> OFDM is part of 11g, 11a, and 11n (2/5ghz.)
>>>
>>> I don't understand why you're asking about it in a security context.
>>
On Sun, Mar 06, 2011 at 11:06:09AM -0500, Steve Wills wrote:
> On 03/06/11 10:37, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
> >
> > At first glance it looks like acl_set_fd_np(3) isn't working on an
> > md-backed filesystem; specifically, it's returning EOPNOTSUPP. You
> > should be able to reproduce the problem by
On 06/03/11 11:31 AM, Etienne Robillard wrote:
> On 06/03/11 09:49 AM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
>
>> OFDM is part of 11g, 11a, and 11n (2/5ghz.)
>>
>> I don't understand why you're asking about it in a security context.
>>
>>
>> Adrian
>>
>>
>
and finally I almost forgot...
there seems to be
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/06/11 11:30, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 06, 2011 at 08:23:42AM -0800, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
>> On Sun, Mar 06, 2011 at 11:06:09AM -0500, Steve Wills wrote:
>>
>> Sorry, I should have been more clear -- my investigation wasn't to
>> det
On 6 Mar 2011, at 16:30, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
2. Are you absolutely 100% sure the kernel you're using was built
with "options UFS_ACL" defined in it? Doing a "strings -a
/boot/kernel/kernel | grep UFS_ACL" should suffice.
>>>
>>> Yep, it does:
>>>
>>> % strings -a /b
On 06/03/11 09:49 AM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> OFDM is part of 11g, 11a, and 11n (2/5ghz.)
>
> I don't understand why you're asking about it in a security context.
>
>
> Adrian
>
Approaching security can be seen with onion paradigm: True paranoids
will want
to have multiple layers of security wheth
I'm no expert in Wifi or in FFT so I'm forwarding your reply to the list
hoping
someone with experience with FFT could share lights on OFDM uses of
FFT functions below the 30khz range... In other words could FreeBSD be
used to control the
electromagnetic energy input from out-of-band VLF/ELF waves
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/06/11 10:37, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
>
> At first glance it looks like acl_set_fd_np(3) isn't working on an
> md-backed filesystem; specifically, it's returning EOPNOTSUPP. You
> should be able to reproduce the problem by doing a setfacl on some
.
> https://gthc.org/investigations/OFDM/72_armstrong_ofdm.pdf
>
> That paper is a basic paper. COFDM is being used just about everywhere now.
> OFDM was used in the Telebit modems of years gone by. To this day
> (last I checked) it is superiour to the v32.bis format used today on
> third world pho
On Sun, Mar 06, 2011 at 09:43:34AM -0500, Steve Wills wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 03/06/11 08:35, Steve Wills wrote:
> > On 03/06/11 04:22, Edward Tomasz NapieraBa wrote:
> >> Wiadomo[ napisana przez Steve Wills w dniu 2011-03-06, o godz. 05:11:
> >
> >> [..]
I would appreciate if you try not to disrupt this thread anymore on
freebsd-current.
Thank you.
On 06/03/11 10:42 AM, Diane Bruce wrote:
> I've moved this off of freebsd-current into private e-mail folks.
>
>
>> Twisted pair? Sorry I don't understand this... Wireless USB dongles are
>>
I've moved this off of freebsd-current into private e-mail folks.
>
> Twisted pair? Sorry I don't understand this... Wireless USB dongles are
...
> This is out-of-scope but I respect your opinion to call me a name attempting
It is not an ad hominem when it is factually true.
These are not chem
my best bet is that VLF/ELF frequencies are using FFT (Fast Fourier
Transform) algorithm to increase compression ratio of WLAN devices
operating with OFDM-enabled hardware. If that is true then not all WLAN
devices
can do OFDM thus explaining why you could use 802.11g without it...
Origi
> No. It's twisted pair so will not radiate that far, it's not an antenna.
> DSL is sent via twisted pair as well and should not radiate very far.
Twisted pair? Sorry I don't understand this... Wireless USB dongles are
being
operating as EMF/RF devices and forcingly will radiate with objects
clos
On Sun, Mar 06, 2011 at 09:56:05AM -0500, Etienne Robillard wrote:
> On 06/03/11 09:33 AM, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
> > On Sunday 06 March 2011 15:23:02 Etienne Robillard wrote:
> >
..
>
> Yes, from a security perspective, could radiance from ELF/VLF operating
> devices as
> "ethernet-class s
On Sun, Mar 06, 2011 at 03:33:32PM +0100, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
> On Sunday 06 March 2011 15:23:02 Etienne Robillard wrote:
> > Hi, as the subject line implies, can someone explains why OFDM (Orthogonal
> > Frequency Division Multiplexing) is required for running run(4) ? Is there
> > any (saf
On 06/03/11 10:01 AM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> OpenBSD has driver support for OFDM chips. Anything that speaks 11a, 11g or
> 11n == OFDM.
>
> You'd have to speak to an RF related person about your definition of
> harmful. I mean, think about it - 802.11 devices are supposed to give off
> EMR that a re
OpenBSD has driver support for OFDM chips. Anything that speaks 11a, 11g or
11n == OFDM.
You'd have to speak to an RF related person about your definition of
harmful. I mean, think about it - 802.11 devices are supposed to give off
EMR that a receiver can decode. So your question about whether OFD
On 06/03/11 09:33 AM, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
> On Sunday 06 March 2011 15:23:02 Etienne Robillard wrote:
>
>> Hi, as the subject line implies, can someone explains why OFDM (Orthogonal
>> Frequency Division Multiplexing) is required for running run(4) ? Is there
>> any (safer) alternative to
OFDM is part of 11g, 11a, and 11n (2/5ghz.)
I don't understand why you're asking about it in a security context.
Adrian
On 6 March 2011 22:23, Etienne Robillard wrote:
> Hi, as the subject line implies, can someone explains why OFDM (Orthogonal
> Frequency Division Multiplexing) is required f
Adrian Chadd wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> For those of you who are testing out my if_ath changes, I'd really
> appreciate it if you'd update to -HEAD and re-test.
Since running the new code, I get a slew of these:
Mar 6 14:41:53 mini wpa_supplicant[422]: Trying to associate with
00:30:4f:58:bf:94 (SSI
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/06/11 08:35, Steve Wills wrote:
> On 03/06/11 04:22, Edward Tomasz NapieraBa wrote:
>> Wiadomo[ napisana przez Steve Wills w dniu 2011-03-06, o godz. 05:11:
>
>> [..]
>
>>> Thanks for your work on this, I'm very happy to have ZFS v28. I just
>
Hi.
I would like to present for review and testing results of my and M.
Warner Losh work on new GEOM-based ataraid(4) replacement - graid.
At this moment we have implemented all required core functionality and
the first set of transformation and metadata modules. Now we have
implemented transform
On Sunday 06 March 2011 15:23:02 Etienne Robillard wrote:
> Hi, as the subject line implies, can someone explains why OFDM (Orthogonal
> Frequency Division Multiplexing) is required for running run(4) ? Is there
> any (safer) alternative to OFDM?
>
> If not, could the FreeBSD security team verify
Which versions did you have stable versus unstable AR9285 behaviour?
I'd like to establish at least a range of subversion revisions so we can
start binary searching which one(s) caused instabilities.
Thanks,
Adrian
On 6 March 2011 22:24, Ian FREISLICH wrote:
> Adrian Chadd wrote:
> > Hi all,
Hi, as the subject line implies, can someone explains why OFDM (Orthogonal
Frequency Division Multiplexing) is required for running run(4) ? Is there
any (safer) alternative to OFDM?
If not, could the FreeBSD security team verify the the safety of OFDM
derived
drivers (in particular wireless ether
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/06/11 04:22, Edward Tomasz Napierała wrote:
> Wiadomość napisana przez Steve Wills w dniu 2011-03-06, o godz. 05:11:
>
> [..]
>
>> Thanks for your work on this, I'm very happy to have ZFS v28. I just
>> updated my -CURRENT system from a snapsho
On Sat, Mar 05, 2011 at 03:33:01PM -0800, David O'Brien wrote:
> Feb 24 19:43:16 : FreeBSD 9.0-CURRENT #662 r218815:218845M: Tue Feb 22
> 00:13:31 PST 2011
> Feb 24 19:43:16 : /sys/i386/compile/DRAGON i386
> [..]
> Mar 5 14:41:38 : start = 0, len = 1659, fs = /storage
> Mar 5 14:41:38 : panic: f
Wiadomość napisana przez Steve Wills w dniu 2011-03-06, o godz. 05:11:
[..]
> Thanks for your work on this, I'm very happy to have ZFS v28. I just
> updated my -CURRENT system from a snapshot from about a month ago to
> code from today. I have 3 pools and one of them is for ports tinderbox.
> I o
On Fri, Feb 25, 2011, Anton Shterenlikht wrote:
> Can somebody please confirm that denormal
> are not available on ia64, see below.
[...]
> The FreeBSD manpage for fpsetmask() at http://tinyurl.com/64oo7zh says:
>
> > #define FP_X_DNML 0x02/* denormal */
The FreeBSD manpage for
49 matches
Mail list logo
