On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 03:38:44PM -0800, Daniel C. Sinclair wrote:
On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 2:15 AM, Henning Brauer lists-open...@bsws.de
wrote:
* Daniel C. Sinclair daniel.c.sincl...@gmail.com [2011-01-11 09:46]:
From the firewalls point of view interfaces are not inside or outside
- they
On Thu, 13 Jan 2011 19:51:48 -0800
Chris Cappuccio ch...@nmedia.net wrote:
nsd is already part of the tree and unbound will join it at some
point to replace bind.
Is it going to happen between 4.9 - 4.10 (5.0)?
--
With best regards,
Gregory Edigarov
Hi,
Just wondering what is going to be after 4.9? 4.10 or 5.0?
--
With best regards,
Gregory Edigarov
On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 10:25:55AM +0200, Gregory Edigarov wrote:
Hi,
Just wondering what is going to be after 4.9? 4.10 or 5.0?
42
--
:wq Claudio
Am 14.01.2011 09:25, schrieb Gregory Edigarov:
Just wondering what is going to be after 4.9? 4.10 or 5.0?
Every 5 years the same question? I bet I'll have a dij` vu in 5 years...
Markus
On Fri, 14 Jan 2011, Markus Hennecke wrote:
Am 14.01.2011 09:25, schrieb Gregory Edigarov:
Just Awondering what is going to be after 4.9? 4.10 or 5.0?
Every 5 years the same question? I bet I'll have a dij` vu in 5 years...
Don't post diacritic characters to the list or don't post them
2011/1/14 Chris Cappuccio ch...@nmedia.net:
nsd is already part of the tree and unbound will join it at some point to
replace bind. they are well documented, fairly easy to use, and unbound is
available through ports. use it.
But a DNSSSEC validiating resolver should be in base, not ports.
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2011 10:06:07 +0100
Subject: Re: DNSSEC validating resolver
From: mar...@oneiros.de
To: misc@openbsd.org
2011/1/14 Chris Cappuccio ch...@nmedia.net:
nsd is already part of the tree and unbound will join it at some point to
replace bind. they are well documented, fairly
On 1/14/11 10:06 AM, Martin Schrvder wrote:
2011/1/14 Chris Cappuccio ch...@nmedia.net:
nsd is already part of the tree and unbound will join it at some point to
replace bind. they are well documented, fairly easy to use, and unbound is
available through ports. use it.
But a DNSSSEC
On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 10:51 PM, Chris Cappuccio ch...@nmedia.net wrote:
nsd is already part of the tree and unbound will join it at some point to
replace bind. B they are well documented, fairly easy to use, and unbound
is
available through ports. use it.
Chris,
Are you suggesting that
On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 4:33 AM, Oliver Peter li...@peter.de.com wrote:
On 1/14/11 10:06 AM, Martin Schrvder wrote:
2011/1/14 Chris Cappuccio ch...@nmedia.net:
nsd is already part of the tree and unbound will join it at some point
to
replace bind. B they are well documented, fairly easy to
On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 1:15 PM, Dragos d...@kyx.net wrote:
On 2011-01-13, at 7:31 AM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
It was my (apparently) lame attempt at being whimsical. Should have made it
I found it amusing. In fact I intend to steal it for my own uses. But maybe
postpenultimate
Gregory Edigarov g...@bestnet.kharkov.ua writes:
Just wondering what is going to be after 4.9? 4.10 or 5.0?
we went from 3.9 to 4.0 five years ago. don't expect version numbers
to go hex or multidigit-between-dots anytime soon. (although hex would
have been kinda fun)
- P
--
Peter N. M.
BIND10 will be written in a combination of Python and C++, not really a
suitable upgrade for OpenBSD's base resolver/nameserver.
Not sure how long BIND9 is going to be maintained by ISC.
-Bryan.
On 1/13/2011 at 5:59 AM David Walker wrote:
|Hi Mike.
|
|[snip]
|
|Second, and here we go into grey area, I'm no expert at the pf thing
|and I do it slightly different to you.
|However, I use a simple ruleset and don't explicitly allow ICMP ...
|and yet it works from internal Windows and OpenBSD
Hi Mike.
Mike wrote:
Yes, I know that Windows uses ICMP for traceroute (I use both the
Windows tracert command line utility and the SamSpade GUI utility).
Cool.
However, I have found that troubleshooting is always easier if one can
eliminate Windows from the mix, that's why I reproduced the
My setup is a pair of OpenBSD 4.8 routers, with 1 dedicated (fxp0) NIC in each
to carry pfsync traffic, and 2 NIC (bge0,1) with multiple VLANs to carry normal
traffic.
I have pfsync+carp set up and I see the carp1-8 (8 distinct VLANs, including
both internal and upstream) being populated and
Hi group,
I am having interesting problem here.
I would like to setup OpenBSD with Squid and transparently intercept
port 80 traffic. Problem is that I have cisco ASA in front which is the
default gateway for outside traffic. How can I setup my Openbsd squid
box so that any packets
.: A maior rede privada de websites de vmdeos e imagens em portugujs :.
www.video-divertido.com - O Maior Portal De Vmdeos De Humor Em Portugujs.
www.aceleras.net - O Portal Em Portugujs Para Todos Os Amantes Do Mundo
Automsvel.
www.brisamusical.com - Mzsica para todos os gostos.
[IMAGE]
!Promociones Especiales de Preventa para grupos!
Empresa Registrada ante la STPS Reg. COLG640205CP30005
Smguenos en Twitter@pmscapacitacion o bien en Facebook PMS de Mixico
Mayores informes responda este correo electrsnico con los siguientes
datos.
Empresa:
Nombre:
Telifono:
Email:
20 matches
Mail list logo
