Hi Levi,
>
> We'd definitely be interested in splitting the workload with you if Bala
> is open to it.
>
Fantastic. It will be great help for us.
The current status of ipmi-pef tool is, it just dumps Event Filter Table
and Alert Policy Table in commented texts in stdout or filename like
bmc-co
Hi Levi,
Firstly, I would say thanks for your appreciation.
>
> We'd also like some more extensive PEF configuration options in
> bmc-config, but I haven't looked into that with any detail yet.
>
In the current FreeIPMI development CVS branch has separate tool called
ipmi-pef. The tool is unde
On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 21:30 +0200, Ingo van Lil wrote:
> All characters up to the first '\0' should be printable (function
> isprint()), all subsequent characters must be '\0'. Otherwise you should
> fall back to hex syntax to be on the safe side. Maybe non-ascii
> characters (>127) should be forbi
Al Chu wrote:
> Here's an idea. How about if the user prefixes his input with a '0x',
> then we assume the user wants to do up to 20 bytes of hex. If not
> prefixed by '0x', then we assume the user is inputting a string?
You could use the syntax that's used for specifying WEP keys in
iwconfig:
On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 13:04 -0600, Levi Pearson wrote:
> Patching bmc-config to support either does seem tricky. The Dell
> utilities to read/set the key deal only in hex. Allowing both opens the
> possibility for two different keys to be specified simultaneously.
I agree it would be a non-perfe
On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 11:54 -0700, Al Chu wrote:
> Cool. Perhaps we could add the K_g fixes you need (are working on??),
> then we could roll out 0.3.3.
>
I'll be working on a patch for the K_g key today; I'll post it sometime
in the next few days for your review.
--Levi
On Thu, 2007-04-19 at 15:51 -0700, Al Chu wrote:
> > I'd like the ability to enter the key in hexadecimal
> > and have it treated as a 20-byte binary field instead of a string, which
> > matches how the key is handled in the Dell utilities.
>
> I faced a similar issue/dilemma early on. Honestly,
On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 12:37 -0600, Levi Pearson wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-04-19 at 22:18 -0700, Albert Chu wrote:
> > Hi Levi,
> >
> > I think it's done. PLMK if it works for you on the dell's.
> >
> > our CVS head (our 0.4.0 eventual release)
> >
> > cvs -z3 -d:pserver:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/sources/f
On Thu, 2007-04-19 at 22:18 -0700, Albert Chu wrote:
> Hi Levi,
>
> I think it's done. PLMK if it works for you on the dell's.
>
> our CVS head (our 0.4.0 eventual release)
>
> cvs -z3 -d:pserver:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/sources/freeipmi co
> freeipmi
>
> our 0.3.X maintenance line
>
> cvs -z3 -d:p
Hi Levi,
I think it's done. PLMK if it works for you on the dell's.
our CVS head (our 0.4.0 eventual release)
cvs -z3 -d:pserver:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/sources/freeipmi co
freeipmi
our 0.3.X maintenance line
cvs -z3 -d:pserver:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/sources/freeipmi co -r
Release-0_3_0_branch freeipm
On Thu, 2007-04-19 at 13:21 -0600, Levi Pearson wrote:
> With the exception of ipmipower and ipmiconsole, the FreeIPMI utilities
> have issues dealing with having Per-Message Authentication and
> User-Level Authentication disabled.
Hi Levi,
One other thought. If the user-level authentication di
Levi,
As I'm looking at the code now, I think I can hammer out permsgauth
support in the tools pretty quick. Gimme a day or so.
Al
On Thu, 2007-04-19 at 15:51 -0700, Al Chu wrote:
> Hi Levi,
>
> On Thu, 2007-04-19 at 13:21 -0600, Levi Pearson wrote:
> > I'd like to work with the core developer
Hi Levi,
On Thu, 2007-04-19 at 13:21 -0600, Levi Pearson wrote:
> I'd like to work with the core developers so that any fixes and new
> features we make are acceptable to you, so we don't have to maintain a
> separate branch.
Sounds good. Glad to have additional support from others.
> With ipm
13 matches
Mail list logo
