Hi All.
I have noticed something regarding routing, and I want to make sure its the
expected behavior.
Lets say I have interface em0 with IP 10.1.1.10/24 and a default route of
10.1.1.1, then I change em0 IP to 10.1.1.10/31 then change it back to
10.1.1.10/24.
I have noticed that my OBSD 5.0 d
On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 4:06 PM, Dewey Hylton wrote:
> if you feel this is a tired and worn-out question, then please just move
along.
>
> two systems on which i'm happily running openbsd on are:
> alix and mac mini. alix for firewalls/thin clients, and the mac mini can
handle pretty much anything
On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 5:35 PM, corey clingo wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 4:45 PM, Henning Brauer
wrote:
>> * corey clingo [2012-01-29 19:47]:
>>> Anyway, I'm reading the pf.conf man page, and I interpret it as saying
>>> that the last matching pass/block rule determines what action is
>>>
On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 4:45 PM, Henning Brauer wrote:
> * corey clingo [2012-01-29 19:47]:
>> Anyway, I'm reading the pf.conf man page, and I interpret it as saying
>> that the last matching pass/block rule determines what action is
>> taken, but the _first_ matching pass rule is what creates th
> i'm hoping the raspberrypi will eventually be supported on openbsd
> (if the hardware proves to be stable, $35 sounds GREAT) but i don't
> have the skills to go there myself.
Wow. Dream on. It is a mess of firmware. You know nothing of our
history?
if you feel this is a tired and worn-out question, then please just move along.
two systems on which i'm happily running openbsd on are:
alix and mac mini. alix for firewalls/thin clients, and the mac mini can handle
pretty much anything i throw at it. both are relatively cheap (new alix and
us
* corey clingo [2012-01-29 19:47]:
> Anyway, I'm reading the pf.conf man page, and I interpret it as saying
> that the last matching pass/block rule determines what action is
> taken, but the _first_ matching pass rule is what creates the state.
> Am I interpreting this correctly?
no, the last on
Quoting corey clingo :
I had to replace the dead hard drive in an old OpenBSD firewall
yesterday (it only ran for about 8 years :), and in the process I had
to re-do my pf.conf to incorporate the newer (post-4.6 or thereabouts)
syntax. I was trying to figure out why I have what appears to be two
Quoting Stuart Henderson :
On 2012-01-28, Vijay Sankar wrote:
Hi,
Sorry for the long message. I am not able to figure out a good
solution for the following:
Right now, what I do to test ports etc., is download install51.iso,
run it within qemu, and then do the work. To test the port on a
dif
On Sun, 29 Jan 2012 21:14:19 +0100
Pruttel wrote:
> Did not know that where do you find the guides to do something like
> that
http://www.openbsd.org/faq/faq15.html
On Sun, 29 Jan 2012 12:46:21 -0600
corey clingo wrote:
> Should I be using match rules to do nat-to/rdr-to
> instead?
Yes.
On 2012-01-28, Stefan Midjich wrote:
> Also the reason I wanted to compile is something I should have stated,
> there's a kernel config online for pcengines alix boards so I wanted to use
> it on mine thinking it was better optimized for the tiny board with very
> few peripherals.
>
> https://raw.
On 2012-01-28, Vijay Sankar wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Sorry for the long message. I am not able to figure out a good
> solution for the following:
>
> Right now, what I do to test ports etc., is download install51.iso,
> run it within qemu, and then do the work. To test the port on a
> different serv
Did not know that where do you find the guides to do something like that
Sent from my iPod
On Jan 28, 2012, at 9:02, Antoine Jacoutot wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 07:47:25AM +0100, Tomas Bodzar wrote:
>>> I know that Open BSD is not really a desk top system.
>>
>> You're completely wrong h
We apologize that http://www.bsdcan.org/ was offline for 12 hours from early
Sunday morning.
The deadline for submissions has been extended to Tuesday 31 January.
BSDCan 2012 will be held 11-12 May, 2012 in Ottawa at the University of
Ottawa. It will be preceded by two days of tutorials on 9-10 M
I had to replace the dead hard drive in an old OpenBSD firewall
yesterday (it only ran for about 8 years :), and in the process I had
to re-do my pf.conf to incorporate the newer (post-4.6 or thereabouts)
syntax. I was trying to figure out why I have what appears to be two
states for each incoming
On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 10:49 AM, Vijay Sankar wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Sorry for the long message. I am not able to figure out a good solution for
> the following:
>
> Right now, what I do to test ports etc., is download install51.iso, run it
> within qemu, and then do the work. To test the port on a dif
On v, jan 29, 2012 at 20:40:35 +1100, Jonathan Gray wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 08:27:16AM +0100, LEVAI Daniel wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> >
> > I'm trying to use an USB serial device with qemu on a OpenBSD host and a
> > winxp guest. I presume the first step would be to recognize this device
> > u
Thanks David, I tried different settings for the type of VM and in the end
the random results I got seem to have been caused by my Alcor CF card
reader. Whenever that device was plugged into the vm OpenBSD would find it
very hard to boot. Sometimes hanging at mtrr, other times at fdc0.
Seemingly ra
* Steffen Daode Nurpmeso [2012-01-28 15:44]:
> I've noted a lot of upload network traffic when doing 'cvs up'
> on OpenBSD repos; i.e., before anything else happened about
> ~70 MB (www) and ~150 MB (src) *upstream* traffic were produced,
> and it took more than an hour before the download of data
On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 08:27:16AM +0100, LEVAI Daniel wrote:
> Hi!
>
>
> I'm trying to use an USB serial device with qemu on a OpenBSD host and a
> winxp guest. I presume the first step would be to recognize this device
> under OpenBSD as some kind of ucom(4). Currently this is printed in
> dmes
21 matches
Mail list logo
