Re: ipv6 support for rdomains?

2013-05-18 Thread Claudio Jeker
On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 08:58:56PM -0600, Mattias Lindgren wrote:
 I was wondering about ipv6 support for rdomains.  I set up a Virtualbox VM 
 running OpenBSD 5.3 with a bridged network to my home network.   
 
 I configured em0 into a vrf:
 
 ifconfig em0 10.50.3.16 255.255.255.0 rdomain 1
 
 and was able to ping the other hosts in my network.
 
 I then configured an IPv6 address into the same vrf:
 
 ifconfig em0 inet6 2601:1::41::3/64 rdomain 1
 
 and was unable to ping the host from the other hosts on my network.  I was 
 unable to test the other way because ping6 appears to not be vrf-aware.  When 
 I tcpdump on the interface I get messages such as:
 
 May 17 20:32:33.010151 00:0c:29:7f:ba:11 33:33:ff:00:00:01 86dd 78: ::  
 ff02::1:ff00:1: icmp6: neighbor sol: who has 2601:1::41::3
 May 17 20:32:33.175504 00:0c:29:7f:ba:11 33:33:ff:7f:ba:11 86dd 78: ::  
 ff02::1:ff7f:ba11: icmp6: neighbor sol: who has fe80::20c:29ff:fe7f:ba11
 
 
 It seems like multicast is getting a little goofy?  I also tried setting my 
 virtual NIC into promiscuous mode, but it did not make a difference.  I will 
 try with a physical box over the weekend, unless someone steps forward and 
 tells me that this is not possible :)  
 
 Does anyone know if it is possible to use ping6 within a routing domain?
 

Currently no. There are bits missing to make rdomains IPv6 aware.
There is some work done but the there are a few problems left to make it
work.

-- 
:wq Claudio



How to Run WindowMaker and GWorkspace on OBSD 5.3

2013-05-18 Thread Tito Mari Francis Escaño
Good day,
I tried to install OpenBSD 5.3 64-bit on VMware Workstation 9.x and so far
it's working like a charm.
I next tried to install WindowMaker, to override the default twm, I created
an .xinitrc file on home directory with just one entry: wmaker. When I
typed startx, as expected, the X window manager is WindowMaker.
I then installed GWorkspace, and to run it, I have to type in the xterm
window: GWorkspace.
I read the man page on startx, I tried to follow the example of
/etc/X11/init/xinitrc where it ran fcwm || xterm to run xterm after the
default WM started, by creating an home dir/.xinitrc with wmaker ||
GWorkspace but it doesn't seem to work.
Can somebody please give me pointers how I can run GWorkspace automatically
when I start X with WindowMaker as WM?
Thank you very much.



Re: How to Run WindowMaker and GWorkspace on OBSD 5.3

2013-05-18 Thread Sebastian Reitenbach
 Hi,

On Saturday, May 18, 2013 16:32 CEST, Tito Mari Francis Escaño 
titomarifran...@gmail.com wrote: 
 
 Good day,
 I tried to install OpenBSD 5.3 64-bit on VMware Workstation 9.x and so far
 it's working like a charm.
 I next tried to install WindowMaker, to override the default twm, I created
 an .xinitrc file on home directory with just one entry: wmaker. When I
 typed startx, as expected, the X window manager is WindowMaker.
 I then installed GWorkspace, and to run it, I have to type in the xterm
 window: GWorkspace.
 I read the man page on startx, I tried to follow the example of
 /etc/X11/init/xinitrc where it ran fcwm || xterm to run xterm after the
 default WM started, by creating an home dir/.xinitrc with wmaker ||
 GWorkspace but it doesn't seem to work.
 Can somebody please give me pointers how I can run GWorkspace automatically
 when I start X with WindowMaker as WM?
 Thank you very much.
 
 
just install the gnustep-desktop meta package:
sudo pkg_add -i gnustep-desktop

then, I have this in my .xsession file in order to start windowmaker and 
GWorkspace:

 
if [ -f /usr/local/share/GNUstep/Makefiles/GNUstep.sh ];then
. /usr/local/share/GNUstep/Makefiles/GNUstep.sh
fi

export GNUSTEP_STRING_ENCODING=NSUTF8StringEncoding
export LC_ALL='en_EN.UTF-8'
export LC_CTYPE='en_US.UTF-8'
if [ -x /usr/local/bin/gpbs ];then
/usr/local/bin/gpbs
fi
if [ -x /usr/local/bin/gdnc ];then
/usr/local/bin/gdnc
fi
wmaker 

if [ -x /usr/local/bin/GWorkspace ];then
/usr/local/bin/make_services
/usr/local/bin/GWorkspace
fi


cheers,
Sebastian



Re: How to Run WindowMaker and GWorkspace on OBSD 5.3

2013-05-18 Thread Marc Espie
On Sat, May 18, 2013 at 10:32:47PM +0800, Tito Mari Francis Escaño wrote:
 I read the man page on startx, I tried to follow the example of
 /etc/X11/init/xinitrc where it ran fcwm || xterm to run xterm after the
 default WM started, by creating an home dir/.xinitrc with wmaker ||
 GWorkspace but it doesn't seem to work.

Of course it won't, you misunderstood what 
prog1 || prog2
does.

It tries to run prog1, and *if that fails* then it runs prog2.
Thus, in fcwm || xterm, the goal is to give you an xterm if the startup
of fcwm fails (for instance, if your config file for the window manager
is bogus).

Among the various things sebastia wrote, he did:
prog1 
prog2

which is a possible shell-construct to start a prog1 in the background and
then start prog2 as well.

In the context of xinitrc, note that when the script exits, then X windows
stops, so you have to write things in the correct order (e.g., the background
program has no effect on when xwindows exits)



Re: How to Run WindowMaker and GWorkspace on OBSD 5.3

2013-05-18 Thread Tito Mari Francis Escaño
Thanks for the pointers SEbastian :)
I tried creating an xsession or .xsession file with those contents but they
didn't work. Following your example, what I did instead was to create on
the home dir the file .xinitrc with the following content:
wmaker 
/usr/local/bin/gpbs
/usr/local/bin/gndc
/usr/local/bin/make_services
/usr/local/bin/GWorkspace

This enabled me to run X with the WindowMaker and automatically starting
GWorkspace, with the effect that exits X11 when I Quit GWorkspace. Thank
you very much. Now my next task is to run the installed apps when I ran the
command:
pkg_add gnustep-desktop

Maybe you can further advise me on this. I'm very grateful. Thank you very
much.



On Sat, May 18, 2013 at 11:15 PM, Sebastian Reitenbach 
sebas...@l00-bugdead-prods.de wrote:

  Hi,

 On Saturday, May 18, 2013 16:32 CEST, Tito Mari Francis Escaño 
 titomarifran...@gmail.com wrote:

  Good day,
  I tried to install OpenBSD 5.3 64-bit on VMware Workstation 9.x and so
 far
  it's working like a charm.
  I next tried to install WindowMaker, to override the default twm, I
 created
  an .xinitrc file on home directory with just one entry: wmaker. When I
  typed startx, as expected, the X window manager is WindowMaker.
  I then installed GWorkspace, and to run it, I have to type in the xterm
  window: GWorkspace.
  I read the man page on startx, I tried to follow the example of
  /etc/X11/init/xinitrc where it ran fcwm || xterm to run xterm after the
  default WM started, by creating an home dir/.xinitrc with wmaker ||
  GWorkspace but it doesn't seem to work.
  Can somebody please give me pointers how I can run GWorkspace
 automatically
  when I start X with WindowMaker as WM?
  Thank you very much.
 

 just install the gnustep-desktop meta package:
 sudo pkg_add -i gnustep-desktop

 then, I have this in my .xsession file in order to start windowmaker and
 GWorkspace:


 if [ -f /usr/local/share/GNUstep/Makefiles/GNUstep.sh ];then
 . /usr/local/share/GNUstep/Makefiles/GNUstep.sh
 fi

 export GNUSTEP_STRING_ENCODING=NSUTF8StringEncoding
 export LC_ALL='en_EN.UTF-8'
 export LC_CTYPE='en_US.UTF-8'
 if [ -x /usr/local/bin/gpbs ];then
 /usr/local/bin/gpbs
 fi
 if [ -x /usr/local/bin/gdnc ];then
 /usr/local/bin/gdnc
 fi
 wmaker 

 if [ -x /usr/local/bin/GWorkspace ];then
 /usr/local/bin/make_services
 /usr/local/bin/GWorkspace
 fi


 cheers,
 Sebastian



Re: openospfd vs bird vs quagga etc on OpenBSD for OSPF interoperating with IOS XE (v4 v6)

2013-05-18 Thread andy
Hi,
Sorry for the slow reply, have just got back home from the RIPE 66
conference in Dublin. Which was great by the way :)
Thank you very much for your comments and suggestions. When building
something like this it is really important to me to hear the experience and
thoughts of others.

Ok, so I think Quagga is out the Window.
This is what I have got it down too.. I have put question marks next to
the items which I am not 100% sure on, and a score of 1 to 10 on how
important it is.


*BIRD;
- Pro's
Widely deployed - 7/10
Heavily tested - 10/10
Great interoperability with Cisco - 10/10
Fast development with many developers working on it - 5/10

- Con's
All routes treated with same priority - 4/10
No CARP demote - (Not sure if this is important or not?) - ?/10

*OpenBGPd/OpenOSPFd;
- Pro's
Tightly integrated into OBSD code - 7/10
Routes support different priorities - 5/10
Supports CARP demote - (Not sure if this is important or not?) - ?/10
Better configuration interface compared to Bird(?) - 3/10

- Con's
Not so widely deployed(?) - 7/10
Not as well tested(?) - 10/10
More likely to have interoperability issues with Cisco maybe(?) - 10/10


I seem to remember seeing something when googling like OpenOSPFd once had
assert fail problems when receiving packets from other routing daemons with
unknown attributes, is this true or still the case? I can't remember where
I heard that so not sure if thats even true.

What is the level of integration with CARP for OpenBGPd and OpenOSPFd?
I.e. Can I have both the Primary 'and' the Backup firewalls sending and
receiving routes all the time, but referring to the CARP IPs in the route
entires so the forwarding plane uses the CARP Masters etc, and the routing
control plane always involves all firewalls etc? This would mean that a
CARP fail-over would effectively be an instantaneous re-convergence? (this
is very important).


The network I am building is as follows;
I have 3 data centres (one primary, one DR/backup, one
staging/development).
I am building 2 brand new POPs at two new central locations using two
Cisco ASR 1002 routers to join the data centres and firewalls I have
inherited together, and bring all POPs/DCs under the same ASN and global IP
prefixes etc.

The DR/backup and staging/dev DCs just have single layer 2 back-haul links
(one to one POP, and the other to the other POP).
The primary data center has a fibre to the first POP, and a second diverse
path fibre to the other POP, and the two POPs have a fibre between them.

 TransitsIXPs
  |
   ---POP1DR_DC
Primary_DC-|   |
   ---POP2-Dev_DC
  |
 TransitsIXPs

The two Cisco ASRs are going to run eBGP to announce our ASN and full
prefix globally etc, eBGP with announce filtering for our IXP peerings,
iBGP to redistribute full internet table routes between them, and OSPF to
redistribute the local DC sub-prefixes etc.

Each of the DR and Dev DCs have two OpenBSD firewalls (in CARP
configuration), and the Primary data centre has six OpenBSD firewalls (3
pairs) to physically separate out the different internal networks in that
data centre (Public DMZ network behind different firewalls to the corporate
business networks etc).

The layer 2 connectivity between the 3 pairs of firewalls at the primary
data centre and the two POPs is provided by VPLS from our Primary
colocation data centre provider who we have a close working relationship
with.

Naturally I have sliced up our public global IP prefix so each pair of
firewalls host their own aggregated IP ranges from the global prefix etc,
and I would like each of these sub-prefixes to be redistributed around
using OSPF between all POPs and all firewalls in all locations etc.

So in the case of the Primary data centre firewalls, they should receive
equal cost multi-path routes for global transit and IXP access via POP1 and
POP2, and routes with different preferences for the DR DC and Dev DC
depending on whether going via POP1 (one hop to DR, and two hops for Dev)
or POP2 (one hop to Dev, and two hops to DR) for example.


So considering the pro's and con's above, this network design, Cisco
interoperability being critical, and firewall fail-over providing
instantaneous re-convergence, is their any advice you can offer regarding
BIRD or OpenOSPFd for the OpenBSD firewalls?


To add another can of worms to the mix, although not entirely important
for the core dynamic routing design under normal operation, the Transits
and IXP access are being provided by our VPLS network provider who have
multiple transits each from Telecom Italia, Level 3 and NTT, and multiple
connections to LONAP (our IXP). This means we only need two 10 GBit uplinks
on our ASRs instead of lots of physical layer 1 connections (Our new POPs
will be in the same racks as their POPs..).

It also means that if both of our ASR routers were to go down, they can
continue providing the layer 3 Transit and IXP access for 

Re: smtpd setup

2013-05-18 Thread Scott
Eric:
Thanks again for your help; it's working again.

All:
While I've got the patience to work up to my final desired configuration
for smtpd, I don't know if any of the rest of you do :)

I'd like to write a section for mail setup in the FAQ. Whether it actually
gets included or not is ultimately not up to me; but I'll work under the
assumption that it will be anyway (but opinions still welcomed).

On the one hand I think I should try my best to complete my desired
configuration and ask on the list again when I can't get parts working.

On the other hand I want to ask as little as possible so that I can
experiment more and get clues from searching around. Chewing on the
information and struggling with it for a while makes it more permanent than
when it's just given to me right away. However, I suspect this might add a
lot of noise to the list.

 Either option assumes due diligence on my part, reading manpages,
searching the list, etc. before posting to list. But you tell me; which of
the two is a more preferred approach on misc?

Either way (or even if you tell me to take off), I respect everyone's time
and appreciate you spending it to help, especially with these 101 type
questions. As usual, thanks in advance.

-Scott



On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 10:41 PM, Eric Faurot e...@faurot.net wrote:

 On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 07:31:42PM -0700, Scott wrote:
  The initial debug advice I got was helpful, so I thought I'd take the
 next
  step and add relaying to gmail (back to that in a minute), but
 apparently I
  just don't get it still. Rolling back to my previously working setup
 failed
  also, this time with a new error: 421. I don't get much help looking for
  explanations of 421 on the web.

 From the log you sent, it fails because the .forward file in your user
 dir is empty.  This is actually a bug that is fixed in the upcoming
 release.  Either rm it, or put the username in there, for now.

  I wondered if somehow I gummed up my queue when I was diddling around
 with
  the relay settings.
 
  # ls /var/spool/smtpd/
  a0
 
  Ok, so that's my just-failed message, so I flush it, just to be sanitary:
 
  # smtpctl remove a0b31f71a4e509ff
  (BTW, is there a way to flush ALL queued messages? smtpctl(8) doesn't
  allude to it. If there isn't, what's the proper way to do so?)

 Get the envelope ids from the mailq output and pass them to smtpctl
 remove.  Something like:

 # mailq | cut -d \| -f 1 | xargs -L 1 smtpctl remove

 Eric.



Re: openospfd vs bird vs quagga etc on OpenBSD for OSPF interoperating with IOS XE (v4 v6)

2013-05-18 Thread Stuart Henderson
On 2013/05/18 18:10, andy wrote:
 Hi,
 Sorry for the slow reply, have just got back home from the RIPE 66
 conference in Dublin. Which was great by the way :)
 Thank you very much for your comments and suggestions. When building
 something like this it is really important to me to hear the experience and
 thoughts of others.
 
 Ok, so I think Quagga is out the Window.
 This is what I have got it down too.. I have put question marks next to
 the items which I am not 100% sure on, and a score of 1 to 10 on how
 important it is.
 
 
 *BIRD;
 - Pro's
 Widely deployed - 7/10
 Heavily tested - 10/10
 Great interoperability with Cisco - 10/10
 Fast development with many developers working on it - 5/10
 
 - Con's
 All routes treated with same priority - 4/10
 No CARP demote - (Not sure if this is important or not?) - ?/10

Important con here if you're talking about running it on OpenBSD is that
this is not a primary platform for them. I think it's safe to say that
far fewer people will be running BIRD on OpenBSD than will be running
OpenOSPFd on OpenBSD. (I mostly just imported it to ports in case it's
useful for interoperability testing rather than to actually use it..)

 *OpenBGPd/OpenOSPFd;
 - Pro's
 Tightly integrated into OBSD code - 7/10
 Routes support different priorities - 5/10

This is important when you're running with multiple routing daemons
but less important if everything is done in one process.

 Supports CARP demote - (Not sure if this is important or not?) - ?/10

If you are using ospfd on a machine (firewall, etc) which is also
running carp, yes it's very important, otherwise a machine can become
carp master when ospf is down so it has no onward routes.

 Better configuration interface compared to Bird(?) - 3/10
 
 - Con's
 Not so widely deployed(?) - 7/10

I don't think it's really possible to say which is more widely deployed..
I'm pretty sure Quagga is more deployed than either, still that wouldn't
make me want to use it unless it was the only option ;)

 Not as well tested(?) - 10/10

see above; definitely better tested than BIRD on OpenBSD.

 More likely to have interoperability issues with Cisco maybe(?) - 10/10

no known problems, and we do minimal dead time for sub-second failover.

 I seem to remember seeing something when googling like OpenOSPFd once had
 assert fail problems when receiving packets from other routing daemons with
 unknown attributes, is this true or still the case? I can't remember where
 I heard that so not sure if thats even true.

You're thinking of something else (possibly quagga's ospfd?)
OpenBSD's ospfd has never had asserts.

 What is the level of integration with CARP for OpenBGPd and OpenOSPFd?
 I.e. Can I have both the Primary 'and' the Backup firewalls sending and
 receiving routes all the time, but referring to the CARP IPs in the route
 entires so the forwarding plane uses the CARP Masters etc, and the routing
 control plane always involves all firewalls etc? This would mean that a
 CARP fail-over would effectively be an instantaneous re-convergence? (this
 is very important).

With OpenOSPFd normally both carp master *and* carp backup will advertise
the route, master with a low (more preferred) metric, backup with a high
metric. So when a failover occurs, the route will not drop out at all,
it will switch straight over. I think this is what you're looking for.
Other routing daemons do not do this.

 The network I am building is as follows;
 I have 3 data centres (one primary, one DR/backup, one
 staging/development).
 I am building 2 brand new POPs at two new central locations using two
 Cisco ASR 1002 routers to join the data centres and firewalls I have
 inherited together, and bring all POPs/DCs under the same ASN and global IP
 prefixes etc.
 
 The DR/backup and staging/dev DCs just have single layer 2 back-haul links
 (one to one POP, and the other to the other POP).
 The primary data center has a fibre to the first POP, and a second diverse
 path fibre to the other POP, and the two POPs have a fibre between them.
 
  TransitsIXPs
   |
---POP1DR_DC
 Primary_DC-|   |
---POP2-Dev_DC
   |
  TransitsIXPs
 
 The two Cisco ASRs are going to run eBGP to announce our ASN and full
 prefix globally etc, eBGP with announce filtering for our IXP peerings,
 iBGP to redistribute full internet table routes between them, and OSPF to
 redistribute the local DC sub-prefixes etc.
 
 Each of the DR and Dev DCs have two OpenBSD firewalls (in CARP
 configuration), and the Primary data centre has six OpenBSD firewalls (3
 pairs) to physically separate out the different internal networks in that
 data centre (Public DMZ network behind different firewalls to the corporate
 business networks etc).
 
 The layer 2 connectivity between the 3 pairs of firewalls at the primary
 data centre and the two POPs is provided by VPLS from our Primary
 colocation data centre provider 

Another year goes by

2013-05-18 Thread Rod Whitworth
Happy birthday Theo.

Many more, I trust.

Thanks for your leadership and the quality work that engenders amongst
others.

R/



*** NOTE *** Please DO NOT CC me. I am subscribed to the list.
Mail to the sender address that does not originate at the list server is 
tarpitted. The reply-to: address is provided for those who feel compelled to 
reply off list. Thankyou.

Rod/
---
This life is not the real thing.
It is not even in Beta.
If it was, then OpenBSD would already have a man page for it.