On Tue, May 02, 2017 at 05:03:20PM +, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> Probably the best thing to do at this point is to write a mail to bugs@:
>
> 1. describe what the machine is doing in detail. carp? ipsec? pfsync?
> what sort of relays? include config (sanitized if necessary, but do that
>
On 2017-05-02, Mathieu BLANC wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 02:06:23PM +0200, Mathieu BLANC wrote:
>> It also kernel panics with just this pf rules :
>> # cat pf_minimal.conf
>> set limit { states 10 }
>> set skip on lo
>> anchor
On Tue, May 02, 2017 at 03:44:43PM +0200, Andre Ruppert wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Im running 6.0 amd64 on a pair of R210 with relayd, but these are R210 (II).
>
> No kernel panics at all, and these systems are working in a live
> environment...
>
> Regards
> Andre
Hi,
Yes, i have also several OpenBSD
Hi,
Im running 6.0 amd64 on a pair of R210 with relayd, but these are R210 (II).
No kernel panics at all, and these systems are working in a live
environment...
Regards
Andre
Am 02.05.17 um 15:03 schrieb Mathieu BLANC:
On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 02:06:23PM +0200, Mathieu BLANC wrote:
It
On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 02:06:23PM +0200, Mathieu BLANC wrote:
> It also kernel panics with just this pf rules :
> # cat pf_minimal.conf
> set limit { states 10 }
> set skip on lo
> anchor "relayd/*"
> pass
On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 10:40:08AM +0200, Mathieu BLANC wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 05:58:02PM +0200, Hiltjo Posthuma wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 02:39:44PM +0200, Mathieu BLANC wrote:
> > > On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 02:22:28PM +0200, Mathieu BLANC wrote:
> > > > I can reproduce the bug
On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 05:58:02PM +0200, Hiltjo Posthuma wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 02:39:44PM +0200, Mathieu BLANC wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 02:22:28PM +0200, Mathieu BLANC wrote:
> > > I can reproduce the bug (on the slave firewall) as many times as I want.
> > >
> >
> > I've
On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 02:39:44PM +0200, Mathieu BLANC wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 02:22:28PM +0200, Mathieu BLANC wrote:
> > I can reproduce the bug (on the slave firewall) as many times as I want.
> >
>
> I've just read https://www.openbsd.org/ddb.html and saw that you need a trace
> for
On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 02:22:28PM +0200, Mathieu BLANC wrote:
> I can reproduce the bug (on the slave firewall) as many times as I want.
>
I've just read https://www.openbsd.org/ddb.html and saw that you need a trace
for all cpu.
http://www.hostingpics.net/viewer.php?id=238876panic9.jpg
On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 12:05:56PM +0300, Mihai Popescu wrote:
> Isn't there a CAPSLOOK written message at panic time on the screen?
> If not, look here:
> http://www.openbsd.org/report.html
>
I can reproduce the bug (on the slave firewall) as many times as I want.
I made some screenshots.
Isn't there a CAPSLOOK written message at panic time on the screen?
If not, look here:
http://www.openbsd.org/report.html
On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 02:42:23PM +0200, Mathieu BLANC wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I have a pair of firewalls running 6.0 (patched with openup in october, no
> patch
> applied since then).
>
> Since the upgrade, this pair has some problem with kernel
> panics (4 times since the upgrade in
12 matches
Mail list logo