Última Presentación Nacional: Control de Almacenes e Inventarios 20 de Septiembre, México D.F.
[IMAGE] !Promociones Especiales para Actualizar a todo su personal! Mayores informes responda este correo electrsnico con los siguientes datos. Empresa: Nombre: Telifono: Email: Nzmero de Interesados: Y en breve le haremos llegar la informacisn completa del evento. O bien comunmquense a nuestros telifonos un ejecutivo con gusto le atendera Tels. (33) 8851-2365, (33)8851-2741. Copyright (C) 2010, PMS Capacitacisn Efectiva de Mixico S.C. Derechos Reservados. PMS de Mixico, El logo de PMS de Mixico son marcas registradas. ADVERTENCIA PMS de Mixico no cuenta con alianzas estratigicas de ningzn tipo dentro de la Republica Mexicana. NO SE DEJE ENGAQAR - DIGA NO A LA PIRATERIA. Todos los logotipos, marcas comerciales e imagenes son propiedad de sus respectivas corporaciones y se utilizan con fines informativos solamente. Este Mensaje ha sido enviado a misc@openbsd.org como usuario de Pms de Mixico o bien un usuario le refiris para recibir este boletmn. Como usuario de Pms de Mixico, en este acto autoriza de manera expresa que Pms de Mixico le puede contactar vma correo electrsnico u otros medios. Si usted ha recibido este mensaje por error, haga caso omiso de el y reporte su cuenta respondiendo este correo con el subject BAJAALMACENES Unsubscribe to this mailing list, reply a blank message with the subject UNSUBSCRIBE BAJAALMACENES Tenga en cuenta que la gestisn de nuestras bases de datos es de suma importancia y no es intencisn de la empresa la inconformidad del receptor. [demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type image/jpeg which had a name of 3 almacenes e inventarios.jpg]
Re: dmesg bug
cat /var/run/dmesg.boot A friend of mine has old Asus A3F and I have found a very interesting bug in dmesg. When I type dmesg I don't get regular dmesg output. It starts in the middle of regular dmesg output and then it prints it 2 more times.
Re: Activating ip6.forwarding and accept_rtadv at the same time
2010/9/6, Claudio Jeker cje...@diehard.n-r-g.com: Only if you plan to use NAT in the near future. /64 is like a /32 in IP. Not enough in most cases. Why? You can always use DHCPv6 and split the rank further... I haven't much studied the protocol itself, but in practice the only system that has trouble with it is Linux due to insufficient kernel-userland interaction - passing of autonomous flag in RA to dhcp6 client. That is obviously a design fault and is only a matter of time before it gets straight (whichever way they choose). A per interface rtadv switch was actually planned. Having it global is stupid. The problem is that in the ivory tower end user systems only have one interface and only routers have more then one interface. The reality is a bit different. How would it look like? New ifconfig parameter? NAT is a much simpler concept than IPv6. I have to agree with that. But in long term, many companies need better solution than multiple NATs and NAT to multiple addresses under heavy load. So why not rewrite it from scratch (and hope not to make the same mistakes again)... Any particular feature that shows the unnecessary complexity? (no flame, if you want to continue to discuss, I'd be glad off list) -- Martin Pelikan
Re: Bridge Monitoring
On Mon, Sep 06, 2010 at 09:26:09PM -0700, James Peltier wrote: Hi All, Now that I have my new bridge in place and happily filtering away I would like to look at monitoring and graphing it. I'd like to setup a monitor port style so that I can send the traffic over to another box for processing. I was thinking of installing symon on the bridge itself and sending it over to another box. Additionally, I was looking at setting up a pflow device and sending it to another box and analyze using something like netflow dashboard. We currently use a Cisco sending data to a GNU/Linux box running MRTG. We use arpwatch, IP Audit and other tools. Any ideas what might be best to use in this case? What are others using to monitor their network firewalls, bridges or networks in general? --- James A. Peltier james_a_pelt...@yahoo.ca pfstat and nfsen. Ken
Re: Bridge Monitoring
On Mon, Sep 06, 2010 at 09:26:09PM -0700, James Peltier wrote: Hi All, Now that I have my new bridge in place and happily filtering away I would like to look at monitoring and graphing it. I'd like to setup a monitor port style so that I can send the traffic over to another box for processing. I was thinking of installing symon on the bridge itself and sending it over to another box. Additionally, I was looking at setting up a pflow device and sending it to another box and analyze using something like netflow dashboard. We currently use a Cisco sending data to a GNU/Linux box running MRTG. We use arpwatch, IP Audit and other tools. Any ideas what might be best to use in this case? What are others using to monitor their network firewalls, bridges or networks in general? Off the top of my head (probably forgetting a lot): munin, symon, cacti, reconnoiter, nfsen, netflow dashboard -- Jason Dixon DixonGroup Consulting http://www.dixongroup.net/
Acount Locked!
[IMAGE] ΧÏηÏÏη ÏÎ±Ï ÎµÎ¹Î½Î±Î¹ κλειδÏμενο Î ÏοÏεξαμε οÏι ανÏιμεÏÏÏiÏαÏε ÏÏοβλημαÏα ÏÏ Î½Î´ εÏÎ·Ï ÏÏο winbank. ÎεÏα αÏο ÏÏÎµÎ¹Ï Î±Î½ÎµÏιÏÏ ÏεiÏ ÏÏοÏÏÎ±Î¸ÎµÎ¹ÎµÏ Î³Î¹Î± να αÏοκÏηÏεÏε ÏÏοÏβαÏη οÏον λογαÏιαÏμο ÏαÏ, Ïο i-bank ÏÏηÏÏη εÏει κλειδÏθεi. ÎÏ Ïο εγινε για να εξαÏÏαλiÏει ÏÎ¿Ï Ï Î»Î¿Î³Î±ÏιαÏÎ¼Î¿Ï Ï ÏÎ±Ï ÎºÎ±Î¹ για Ïην ÏÏοÏÏαÏiα ιδιÏÏÎ¹ÎºÎµÏ ÏληÏοÏοÏiÎµÏ ÏαÏ. ΠαÏÎ±ÎºÎ±Î»Ï ÏÏ Î½Î´ÎµÏεiÏε με Ïο iâÏÏαÏεζα και Î±ÎºÎ¿Î»Î¿Ï Î¸Î·ÏÏε Ïα βημαÏα για Ïιν αÏοκαÏαÏÏαÏη ÏÎ·Ï ÏÏοÏβαÏÎ·Ï ÏÎ¿Ï ÏÏηÏÏη Internet Banking εiÏοδοÏ: https://www.winbank.gr/EL/Pages/default.aspx Winbank, www.winbank.gr
Revista El Patio y novedades
[IMAGE] Editorial Pila Teleqa Estimado compaqer@ de Educacisn Fmsica, === Permmteme unos minutos para presentarte un libro de texto para tus alumnos. Fundamentos Tesricos de la Educacisn Fmsica He aqum un botsn como ejemplo, el mndice: Bloque 1: condicisn fmsica 1. La actividad fmsica 2. El calentamiento 3. Los estiramientos 4. Condicisn fmsica y capacidades fmsicas basicas 5. La fuerza 6. La resistencia 7. La velocidad 8. La flexibilidad Bloque 2: habilidades especmficas 9. Cualidades motrices: el movimiento coordinado 10. El equilibrio 11. La coordinacisn Bloque 3: Educacisn Fmsica y salud 12. El cuerpo humano: bases anatsmicas y fisiolsgicas 13. Postura corporal 14. Nutricisn y entrenamiento 15. Relajacisn 16. Primeros auxilios 17. Planificacisn para un programa de entrenamiento Bloque 4 18. La Educacisn Fmsica en la historia 19. Educacisn Fmsica y deporte 20. El movimiento Olmmpico Este libro recoge justamente lo que su nombre indica, los fundamentos de nuestra asignatura. Lo que toda persona que haya terminado la Educacisn Secundaria Obligatoria deberma saber a lo largo de su vida adulta. Es un solo libro para toda la ESO y el Bachillerato. Lo utilizas como herramienta de lectura y escritura cuando te parezca bien en tu programacisn. Un libro de referencia sobre la actividad fmsica y lo motriz. Un excelente libro para cualquier persona interesada en lo deportivo. Una magnmfica obra para aquellos que quieren saber y entender los porquis de la actividad fmsica y la la mntima relacisn de la Educacisn Fmsica con los valores y el deporte. Esta escrito de manera pedagsgica, clara y facil de entender. Si quieres saber mas, haz click aqum P.S. La editorial Pila Teleqa es es una pequeqa editorial. Si lo compras y no te gusta, nos comprometemos a devolverte el dinero, pero por favor no nos pidas muestras gratuitas, porque simplemente no podemos competir con las grandes marcas del sector. !Te esperamos! en www.pilatelena.com Mov. 609 25 20 82 pilatel...@pilatelena.com Si no quieres recibir mas informacisn escribe a bajas.bole...@pilatelena.com
Re: Checking Routes/Gateways For Good Connection
On Aug 30, 2010 at 3:36 PM, Henning Brauer wrote: why don't you look at the real interfaces instead of speculating. pflog is a bit messy, but that's another story hopefully solved soon. -- Henning Brauer, h...@bsws.de, henn...@openbsd.org BS Web Services, http://bsws.de Full-Service ISP - Secure Hosting, Mail and DNS Services Dedicated Servers, Rootservers, Application Hosting I took your advice and ran a log on both external interfaces in addition to pflog0. What I found was that there was no problem with my pass rules. I failed to realize that the match rules for the NAT were affecting the packet prior to the pass rules (duh) and after translation I wasn't seeing the output in the log because I was logging for only the addresses of the internal interfaces. What I found _IS_ the problem is that my match rules for NAT are failing to match every time. They are as follows: match out on $ext_if_1 from (vether0) nat-to ($ext_if_1) match out on $ext_if_2 from (vether1) nat-to ($ext_if_2) What I'm seeing by logging the two external interfaces is the result of: $ traceroute -s 172.16.0.1 -n google.com (172.16.0.1 is the IP for vether0) ...sometimes gets matched by the nat-to rule, which correctly shows up in tcpdump on the external interface with the source being the external interface's IP address. The result of this command of course gets the expected traceroute replies. The problem is, when running the exact same command over and over, is that half the time I'm seeing the traceroute requests going out on the external interface with the source being 172.16.0.1. This of course gets no replies because the NAT isn't happening. Any clues as to why my match rules work only half the time?
Carp trying to send packet on wrong domain
Dear list, I found impossible to have a carp interface in rdomain environment on both the stable and current distributions. Inserting this configuration: ifconfig em0 up ifconfig vlan101 172.26.196.2 netmask 255.255.255.248 vlan 101 vlandev em0 rdomain 101 ifconfig carp101 vhid 1 pass testpw carpdev vlan101 rdomain 101 172.26.196.6 netmask 255.255.255.248 produces this system messages: carp101: trying to send packet on wrong domain. 101 vs. 0, AF 2 carp101: trying to send packet on wrong domain. 101 vs. 0, AF 2 carp101: trying to send packet on wrong domain. 101 vs. 0, AF 2 and the carp does not work. Obviously, removing the rdomain option from carp ifconfig, it's works but the system installs the route in the default domain and this is unwelcome. Thank you in advance, Stefano
Re: Distribute bandwidth by IP's
On 07/09/10 13:21, roberth wrote: On Tue, 07 Sep 2010 13:15:03 -0500 Hermes Ojeda Ruizhermes@gmail.com wrote: Hi, Maybe this is a basic question, but I've read the man pages and the PF book and I don't know how solve this problem. - I have an E1 and the problem is how to distribute the bandwidth equally on all the ip's. There are some constraints like use DHCP, and no block ports. The company provide full access internet to the clients, and the only limit to the client is the bandwidth, that one client don't consume all the bandwidth, and all have a good service. I have some simple firewalls with prioritization, but I don't know how should do that. May be with CBQ but they are a lot of rules. I found this: http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-pfm=111772724522153w=2 Can I do that with PF? Need another tool? Sorry, my english is a really bad thing. Thanks in advance with your support. Start here: http://www.openbsd.org/faq/pf/queueing.html Yes, I have read it. May be with CBQ I can do that, but there are ~150 ip's Thanks for your fast reply.
Re: Distribute bandwidth by IP's
Sorry, if my explanation don't have enough details. - The internet connection is an E1 - There are ~150 users (IPs) - The company give full internet access to the clients. With no service restriction. - There only a C class LAN. E1 --- OpenBSD Firewall --- LAN with ~150 IPs The problem is to distribute equally the bandwidth to the users. My first approach is a CBQ rule by user giving a minimum bandwidth quote and using the borrow option, to use the remaining bandwidth when some users don't waste the bandwidth. But the number of rules is so big. I hope that my explanation can be useful. On 07/09/10 13:43, Johan Beisser wrote: On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 11:15 AM, Hermes Ojeda Ruizhermes@gmail.com wrote: Hi, Maybe this is a basic question, but I've read the man pages and the PF book and I don't know how solve this problem. - I have an E1 and the problem is how to distribute the bandwidth equally on all the ip's. There are some constraints like use DHCP, and no block ports. What exactly are you trying to accomplish. Please explain a little more, in detail. I have some simple firewalls with prioritization, but I don't know how should do that. May be with CBQ but they are a lot of rules. If you're trying to set up a fair service, remember that PF simply processes the packets as they come in. So turn off queues, or define what you're trying to accomplish first. If you're trying to ensure some kinds of traffic can always leave fairly take a look at using HFSC queuing, then define the queues based on ports and use packet tagging to define what matches each queue. http://cvs.openbsd.org/faq/pf/tagging.html jb
Re: Distribute bandwidth by IP's
:) ok, that was my last option. I was looking a more elegant solution, may be using tables or something like that. But if there is no choice, I'll do that. Thanks for your reply On 07/09/10 13:56, roberth wrote: your config
Re: Distribute bandwidth by IP's
- Original Message From: Hermes Ojeda Ruiz hermes@gmail.com To: misc@openbsd.org Sent: Tue, September 7, 2010 12:09:03 PM Subject: Re: Distribute bandwidth by IP's Sorry, if my explanation don't have enough details. - The internet connection is an E1 - There are ~150 users (IPs) - The company give full internet access to the clients. With no service restriction. - There only a C class LAN. E1 --- OpenBSD Firewall --- LAN with ~150 IPs The problem is to distribute equally the bandwidth to the users. My first approach is a CBQ rule by user giving a minimum bandwidth quote and using the borrow option, to use the remaining bandwidth when some users don't waste the bandwidth. But the number of rules is so big. I hope that my explanation can be useful. On 07/09/10 13:43, Johan Beisser wrote: On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 11:15 AM, Hermes Ojeda Ruizhermes@gmail.com wrote: Hi, Maybe this is a basic question, but I've read the man pages and the PF book and I don't know how solve this problem. - I have an E1 and the problem is how to distribute the bandwidth equally on all the ip's. There are some constraints like use DHCP, and no block ports. What exactly are you trying to accomplish. Please explain a little more, in detail. I have some simple firewalls with prioritization, but I don't know how should do that. May be with CBQ but they are a lot of rules. If you're trying to set up a fair service, remember that PF simply processes the packets as they come in. So turn off queues, or define what you're trying to accomplish first. If you're trying to ensure some kinds of traffic can always leave fairly take a look at using HFSC queuing, then define the queues based on ports and use packet tagging to define what matches each queue. http://cvs.openbsd.org/faq/pf/tagging.html jb Why are you trying to do this? It seems overly complex to setup a queue for each IP on the network just to allow them to borrow bandwidth from each other which they would be doing anyway. It would seem more manageable to either segment the network (DMZ, IT Staff, Users) such that you can assign a segment to respective queues or in a different method to queue based on traffic type (http/ftp/ssh,etc). Filtering rules would also be incredibly more simplified. --- James A. Peltier james_a_pelt...@yahoo.ca
Re: Distribute bandwidth by IP's
On Tue, 07 Sep 2010 13:34:45 -0500 Hermes Ojeda Ruiz hermes@gmail.com wrote: On 07/09/10 13:21, roberth wrote: On Tue, 07 Sep 2010 13:15:03 -0500 Hermes Ojeda Ruizhermes@gmail.com wrote: Hi, Maybe this is a basic question, but I've read the man pages and the PF book and I don't know how solve this problem. - I have an E1 and the problem is how to distribute the bandwidth equally on all the ip's. There are some constraints like use DHCP, and no block ports. The company provide full access internet to the clients, and the only limit to the client is the bandwidth, that one client don't consume all the bandwidth, and all have a good service. I have some simple firewalls with prioritization, but I don't know how should do that. May be with CBQ but they are a lot of rules. I found this: http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-pfm=111772724522153w=2 Can I do that with PF? Need another tool? Sorry, my english is a really bad thing. Thanks in advance with your support. Start here: http://www.openbsd.org/faq/pf/queueing.html Yes, I have read it. May be with CBQ I can do that, but there are ~150 ip's Thanks for your fast reply. (...) So just put ~150 (*2 for both directions) child queues in your config. Seems tedious, but that's the way it works atm. Only shortcut i am aware of is to use a script to generate those lines instead of copy/paste/edit. ;)
Re: Distribute bandwidth by IP's
Yes, It's a little complex but is a requirement to guarantee a little bandwidth to the user. (and of course use the remaining unused bandwidth). There is another way? Thanks for the reply On 07/09/10 15:14, James Peltier wrote: - Original Message From: Hermes Ojeda Ruizhermes@gmail.com To: misc@openbsd.org Sent: Tue, September 7, 2010 12:09:03 PM Subject: Re: Distribute bandwidth by IP's Sorry, if my explanation don't have enough details. - The internet connection is an E1 - There are ~150 users (IPs) - The company give full internet access to the clients. With no service restriction. - There only a C class LAN. E1 --- OpenBSD Firewall --- LAN with ~150 IPs The problem is to distribute equally the bandwidth to the users. My first approach is a CBQ rule by user giving a minimum bandwidth quote and using the borrow option, to use the remaining bandwidth when some users don't waste the bandwidth. But the number of rules is so big. I hope that my explanation can be useful. On 07/09/10 13:43, Johan Beisser wrote: On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 11:15 AM, Hermes Ojeda Ruizhermes@gmail.com wrote: Hi, Maybe this is a basic question, but I've read the man pages and the PF book and I don't know how solve this problem. - I have an E1 and the problem is how to distribute the bandwidth equally on all the ip's. There are some constraints like use DHCP, and no block ports. What exactly are you trying to accomplish. Please explain a little more, in detail. I have some simple firewalls with prioritization, but I don't know how should do that. May be with CBQ but they are a lot of rules. If you're trying to set up a fair service, remember that PF simply processes the packets as they come in. So turn off queues, or define what you're trying to accomplish first. If you're trying to ensure some kinds of traffic can always leave fairly take a look at using HFSC queuing, then define the queues based on ports and use packet tagging to define what matches each queue. http://cvs.openbsd.org/faq/pf/tagging.html jb Why are you trying to do this? It seems overly complex to setup a queue for each IP on the network just to allow them to borrow bandwidth from each other which they would be doing anyway. It would seem more manageable to either segment the network (DMZ, IT Staff, Users) such that you can assign a segment to respective queues or in a different method to queue based on traffic type (http/ftp/ssh,etc). Filtering rules would also be incredibly more simplified. --- James A. Peltier james_a_pelt...@yahoo.ca
Re: Activating ip6.forwarding and accept_rtadv at the same time
On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 10:23:19AM +0200, Martin Pelikan wrote: 2010/9/6, Claudio Jeker cje...@diehard.n-r-g.com: Only if you plan to use NAT in the near future. /64 is like a /32 in IP. Not enough in most cases. Why? You can always use DHCPv6 and split the rank further... I haven't much studied the protocol itself, but in practice the only system that has trouble with it is Linux due to insufficient kernel-userland interaction - passing of autonomous flag in RA to dhcp6 client. That is obviously a design fault and is only a matter of time before it gets straight (whichever way they choose). As soon as you spilt a /64 into something smaler you left IPv6 land end entered something that looks like IPv6 but isn't. Sure it is possible but by doing it you make every IPv6 disciple scream in agony (which is probably a good thing anyway). Sure a /64 is a bit more then a /32 since a /64 represents one single LAN compared to a single address but in the end it is far less then 2^64 IPs. A per interface rtadv switch was actually planned. Having it global is stupid. The problem is that in the ivory tower end user systems only have one interface and only routers have more then one interface. The reality is a bit different. How would it look like? New ifconfig parameter? That was the plan. NAT is a much simpler concept than IPv6. I have to agree with that. But in long term, many companies need better solution than multiple NATs and NAT to multiple addresses under heavy load. So why not rewrite it from scratch (and hope not to make the same mistakes again)... In some cases companies could run without the double and tripple NAT but the don't want it. It is a requirement for them. Reality is different then the IPv6 theory and this is slowly recognized. Any particular feature that shows the unnecessary complexity? (no flame, if you want to continue to discuss, I'd be glad off list) I think the number 1 question I have about IPv6 is: What is wrong with arp? and maybe as an alternation Why rely so massivly on multicast instead of a simple LAN broadcast? These two things are partially responsible for the failure of IPv6. There is more political nonsense but on the technical side it is the thing that makes IPv6 so stupidly complex. -- :wq Claudio
Re: Activating ip6.forwarding and accept_rtadv at the same time
I think the number 1 question I have about IPv6 is: What is wrong with arp? Nothing is wrong with arp. As a result of avoiding arp, IPv6 is a duck sitting in a tailing pond. It isn't dead yet.
Re: Distribute bandwidth by IP's
- Original Message From: Hermes Ojeda Ruiz hermes@gmail.com To: misc@openbsd.org Sent: Tue, September 7, 2010 1:38:41 PM Subject: Re: Distribute bandwidth by IP's Yes, It's a little complex but is a requirement to guarantee a little bandwidth to the user. (and of course use the remaining unused bandwidth). There is another way? Thanks for the reply On 07/09/10 15:14, James Peltier wrote: - Original Message From: Hermes Ojeda Ruizhermes@gmail.com To: misc@openbsd.org Sent: Tue, September 7, 2010 12:09:03 PM Subject: Re: Distribute bandwidth by IP's Sorry, if my explanation don't have enough details. - The internet connection is an E1 - There are ~150 users (IPs) - The company give full internet access to the clients. With no service restriction. - There only a C class LAN. E1 --- OpenBSD Firewall --- LAN with ~150 IPs The problem is to distribute equally the bandwidth to the users. My first approach is a CBQ rule by user giving a minimum bandwidth quote and using the borrow option, to use the remaining bandwidth when some users don't waste the bandwidth. But the number of rules is so big. I hope that my explanation can be useful. On 07/09/10 13:43, Johan Beisser wrote: On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 11:15 AM, Hermes Ojeda Ruizhermes@gmail.com wrote: Hi, Maybe this is a basic question, but I've read the man pages and the PF book and I don't know how solve this problem. - I have an E1 and the problem is how to distribute the bandwidth equally on all the ip's. There are some constraints like use DHCP, and no block ports. What exactly are you trying to accomplish. Please explain a little more, in detail. I have some simple firewalls with prioritization, but I don't know how should do that. May be with CBQ but they are a lot of rules. If you're trying to set up a fair service, remember that PF simply processes the packets as they come in. So turn off queues, or define what you're trying to accomplish first. If you're trying to ensure some kinds of traffic can always leave fairly take a look at using HFSC queuing, then define the queues based on ports and use packet tagging to define what matches each queue. http://cvs.openbsd.org/faq/pf/tagging.html jb Why are you trying to do this? It seems overly complex to setup a queue for each IP on the network just to allow them to borrow bandwidth from each other which they would be doing anyway. It would seem more manageable to either segment the network (DMZ, IT Staff, Users) such that you can assign a segment to respective queues or in a different method to queue based on traffic type (http/ftp/ssh,etc). Filtering rules would also be incredibly more simplified. --- James A. Peltier james_a_pelt...@yahoo.ca Well since you're talking service level agreements it is understandable that you might want to do such a thing and in such case you would have no choice but to create the individual queues/rules manually or by script. Still, likely you will run into other issues, such as the number of queues available by default in the code that may need to be tweaked. See a post earlier this month to misc@ about how to do that. Also, perhaps there will be a performance hit in the evaluation of all the queues that might be more hindering than helpful? Best to let the devs speak to that though. --- James A. Peltier james_a_pelt...@yahoo.ca
NT360 SANAL TUR
NT360 SANAL TUR === TanD1tD1mlarD1nD1zda farklD1lD1k yaratacak, rakiplerinize karE D1 sizi bir adD1m daha C6ne taE D1yacak, ucuz, zahmetsiz ve kaliteli bir tanD1tD1m yC6ntemi olarak size NT360 SANAL TUR`u C6neriyoruz. AC'D1k veya kapalD1 mekan tanD1tD1mlarD1nD1z iC'in ilk noktada sadece 150 TL, sonraki her noktadan yapD1lacak C'ekimler iC'inse sadece ve sadece 50 TL C6demeniz yeterli olacaktD1r. Mevcut ekonomik E artlarda bu tCr ucuz ve faydalD1 bir tanD1tD1mD1 mutlaka deD erlendirmelisiniz. Crnek uygulamalara buradan ulaE abilirsiniz. Not : * D0stanbul dD1E D1 C'ekim Ccretleri, belirtilen illerin uzaklD1D D1na gC6re deD iE ebilmektedir. * Fiyatlara KDV dahil deD ildir. NT360 Tel : 0532 786 03 45 www.nt-360.com
opensmtpd crashing intermittently
Gilles (or anybody),
I've been using smtpd since 4.6-RELEASE, for one domain-several email
addresses, plus one constantly receiving mailing list emails (including
misc@). It's been great.
Problem is, I've just set up smtpd on 4.7-RELEASE, using a very simple
ruleset, with the aim of using this as an outgoing only smtp server, for
an in-house weekly newsletter, going out to 3000+ recipients. The
server crashes intermittently. With smtpd started with the -dvf
arguments, I can see where it breaks:
...
lookup_a mx2.mail.eu.yahoo.com:0
fatal: dns: fork: Resource temporarily unavailable
lookup_ptr success
mta: getting datafd
lost child: lookup agent exited abnormally
queue handler exiting
mail filter exiting
mail delivery agent exiting
control process exiting
mail transfer agent exiting
smtp server exiting
runner handler exiting
parent terminating
lookup_a success
loolookup_ptr success
kup_a mx1.mail.eu.yahoo.com:0
lookup_ptr success
lookup_a success
lookup_mx success
fatal: dns_dispatch_parent: msgbuf_write: Broken pipe
# (command prompt)
# lookup_ptr success
fatal: dns_dispatch_parent: msgbuf_write: Broken pipe
Obviously, the record being looked up constantly changes, but the crash
is always the same: msgbuf_write: Broken pipe.
Now, I realise, from reading this list, that smtpd is not meant to be
production-ready, but I'm happy to use it (so long as it works) and test
it, and send information back to the developers, where relevant.
Is this a bug that's been looked at and fixed since -RELEASE?
My ruleset:
ext_if= re0
listen on $ext_if
map aliases { source db /etc/mail/aliases.db }
accept for local alias aliases deliver to maildir
accept from all for all relay
accept for all relay
My dmesg follows:
OpenBSD 4.7 (GENERIC.MP) #130: Wed Mar 17 20:48:50 MDT 2010
dera...@amd64.openbsd.org:/usr/src/sys/arch/amd64/compile/GENERIC.MP
real mem = 2145255424 (2045MB)
avail mem = 2078703616 (1982MB)
mainbus0 at root
bios0 at mainbus0: SMBIOS rev. 2.4 @ 0xf0100 (39 entries)
bios0: vendor Award Software International, Inc. version F4 date 04/03/2009
bios0: Gigabyte Technology Co., Ltd. EP41-UD3L
acpi0 at bios0: rev 0
acpi0: tables DSDT FACP HPET MCFG APIC SSDT SSDT SSDT SSDT SSDT
acpi0: wakeup devices PEX0(S5) PEX1(S5) PEX2(S5) PEX3(S5) PEX4(S5) PEX5(S5)
HUB0(S5) UAR1(S3) USB0(S3) USB1(S3) USB2(S3) USB3(S3) USBE(S3) AZAL(S5) PCI0(S5)
acpitimer0 at acpi0: 3579545 Hz, 24 bits
acpihpet0 at acpi0: 14318179 Hz
acpimadt0 at acpi0 addr 0xfee0: PC-AT compat
cpu0 at mainbus0: apid 0 (boot processor)
cpu0: Pentium(R) Dual-Core CPU E5300 @ 2.60GHz, 2600.28 MHz
cpu0:
FPU,VME,DE,PSE,TSC,MSR,PAE,MCE,CX8,APIC,SEP,MTRR,PGE,MCA,CMOV,PAT,PSE36,CFLUSH,DS,ACPI,MMX,FXSR,SSE,SSE2,SS,HTT,TM,SBF,SSE3,MWAIT,DS-CPL,VMX,EST,TM2,CX16,xTPR,NXE,LONG
cpu0: 2MB 64b/line 8-way L2 cache
cpu0: apic clock running at 199MHz
cpu1 at mainbus0: apid 1 (application processor)
cpu1: Pentium(R) Dual-Core CPU E5300 @ 2.60GHz, 2599.94 MHz
cpu1:
FPU,VME,DE,PSE,TSC,MSR,PAE,MCE,CX8,APIC,SEP,MTRR,PGE,MCA,CMOV,PAT,PSE36,CFLUSH,DS,ACPI,MMX,FXSR,SSE,SSE2,SS,HTT,TM,SBF,SSE3,MWAIT,DS-CPL,VMX,EST,TM2,CX16,xTPR,NXE,LONG
cpu1: 2MB 64b/line 8-way L2 cache
ioapic0 at mainbus0: apid 2 pa 0xfec0, version 20, 24 pins
ioapic0: misconfigured as apic 0, remapped to apid 2
acpiprt0 at acpi0: bus 0 (PCI0)
acpiprt1 at acpi0: bus 2 (PEX0)
acpiprt2 at acpi0: bus -1 (PEX1)
acpiprt3 at acpi0: bus -1 (PEX2)
acpiprt4 at acpi0: bus 3 (PEX3)
acpiprt5 at acpi0: bus -1 (PEX4)
acpiprt6 at acpi0: bus -1 (PEX5)
acpiprt7 at acpi0: bus 4 (HUB0)
acpicpu0 at acpi0: C3, C2, C1, FVS, 1600, 1200 MHz
acpicpu1 at acpi0: C3, C2, C1, FVS, 1600, 1200 MHz
acpibtn0 at acpi0: PWRB
pci0 at mainbus0 bus 0
pchb0 at pci0 dev 0 function 0 Intel G41 Host rev 0x03
ppb0 at pci0 dev 1 function 0 vendor Intel, unknown product 0x2e31 rev 0x03:
apic 2 int 16 (irq 10)
pci1 at ppb0 bus 1
vga1 at pci1 dev 0 function 0 ATI Radeon HD 4550 rev 0x00
wsdisplay0 at vga1 mux 1: console (80x25, vt100 emulation)
wsdisplay0: screen 1-5 added (80x25, vt100 emulation)
azalia0 at pci1 dev 0 function 1 ATI Radeon HD 4000 HD Audio rev 0x00: apic 2
int 17 (irq 12)
azalia0: no supported codecs
azalia0: initialization failure, detaching
azalia1 at pci0 dev 27 function 0 Intel 82801GB HD Audio rev 0x01: apic 2 int
16 (irq 10)
azalia1: codecs: Realtek ALC888
audio0 at azalia1
ppb1 at pci0 dev 28 function 0 Intel 82801GB PCIE rev 0x01: apic 2 int 16
(irq 10)
pci2 at ppb1 bus 2
ppb2 at pci0 dev 28 function 3 Intel 82801GB PCIE rev 0x01: apic 2 int 19
(irq 11)
pci3 at ppb2 bus 3
re0 at pci3 dev 0 function 0 Realtek 8168 rev 0x02: RTL8168C/8111C (0x3c00),
apic 2 int 19 (irq 11), address 00:24:1d:d0:a2:d8
rgephy0 at re0 phy 7: RTL8169S/8110S PHY, rev. 2
uhci0 at pci0 dev 29 function 0 Intel 82801GB USB rev 0x01: apic 2 int 23
(irq 5)
uhci1 at pci0 dev 29 function 1 Intel 82801GB USB rev 0x01: apic 2 int 19
(irq 11)
uhci2 at pci0 dev 29 function 2 Intel 82801GB USB rev 0x01: apic 2 int 18
(irq 7)
uhci3 at pci0 dev 29
Re: Distribute bandwidth by IP's
On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 01:56:57PM -0700, James Peltier wrote: Also, perhaps there will be a performance hit in the evaluation of all the queues that might be more hindering than helpful? With an E1? Even if you lose a little bit of throughput (which I doubt, if you are running hardware that you can do a regular install on), some kind of QoS is a must on such an oversubscribed line. It will very likely be completely unusable without it. Jussi Peltola
Re: opensmtpd crashing intermittently
Sacha El Masry writes: fatal: dns: fork: Resource temporarily unavailable lost child: lookup agent exited abnormally fatal: dns_dispatch_parent: msgbuf_write: Broken pipe fatal: dns_dispatch_parent: msgbuf_write: Broken pipe These messages make me wonder if you have a problem with RLIMIT_NPROC being too low. Try giving the _smtpd user a higher limit? If you look at fork(2), that and swap are really the only reasons fork should fail. Just a guess, I don't really know.
