On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 05:02:48PM -0500, Ted Unangst wrote:
D'Arcy J.M. Cain wrote:
On Thu, 26 Feb 2015 15:22:36 -0500
Ted Unangst t...@tedunangst.com wrote:
Well, there's what should happen and what does happen. The behavior
described sounds a lot like it's keeping state. You can
You're right.
On Feb 26, 2015 5:30 PM, Jason Adams adams...@gmail.com wrote:
On 02/26/2015 01:19 PM, Ted Unangst wrote:
Naim, Halim. wrote:
Alexander Hall alexan...@beard.se writes:
On February 26, 2015 7:36:08 PM CET, halimsr...@gmail.com wrote:
I was upgrading my system today to the
I am running pf under NetBSD. As far as I know it is pretty much stock
OpenBSD pf. I asked this question in the NetBSD mailing list but
didn't gat a useful answer. I hope that someone here has a deeper
understanding of how pf works. Note the examples here are from
November last year but it is
On 2/26/15, Ulf Brosziewski ulf.brosziew...@t-online.de wrote:
On 02/26/2015 02:32 AM, patrick keshishian wrote:
On 2/25/15, Ulf Brosziewskiulf.brosziew...@t-online.de wrote:
On 02/25/2015 11:53 PM, patrick keshishian wrote:
Hi,
On 2/25/15, joshua steinj...@openbsd.org wrote:
On Tue, 24
In gmane.os.openbsd.misc, Andy Lemin wrote:
Hopefully this is just a quick question and I'm missing something here, but it
seems that we can no longer use percentages in our PF child queues.
It hasn't been implemented for the queue rewrite yet.
That said, there is a bug which makes it less
D'Arcy J.M. Cain wrote:
So why would packets continue to come in for 2.5 hours? My guess is
that the hacker is keeping the connection open and attacking over it
for 2.5 hours. Does the packet filter not apply to existing
connections? Is there some way to change that behaviour?
Yes, that's
Hi,
In august of 2014, I reported a bug, that makes cairo unstable and gives
some segafaults. There was some other people with the same problem.
They fixed it, but the fix was only introduced in 1.13, so the
openbsd cairo version, have the problem.
I would like to know if can this patches be
On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 12:11:34PM -0500, Ted Unangst wrote:
D'Arcy J.M. Cain wrote:
So why would packets continue to come in for 2.5 hours? My guess is
that the hacker is keeping the connection open and attacking over it
for 2.5 hours. Does the packet filter not apply to existing
I was upgrading my system today to the most recent snapshot (from a
previous snapshot). The Upgrade process failed (After booting bsd.rd),
with error 'uid 0 on /: file system full'
I finally found out that the problem was that my /bsd was a symlink to
/bsd.sp (I had modified it to test if the ehci
D'Arcy J.M. Cain wrote:
On Thu, 26 Feb 2015 12:11:34 -0500
Ted Unangst t...@tedunangst.com wrote:
D'Arcy J.M. Cain wrote:
So why would packets continue to come in for 2.5 hours? My guess is
that the hacker is keeping the connection open and attacking over it
for 2.5 hours. Does the
On Thu, 26 Feb 2015 12:11:34 -0500
Ted Unangst t...@tedunangst.com wrote:
D'Arcy J.M. Cain wrote:
So why would packets continue to come in for 2.5 hours? My guess is
that the hacker is keeping the connection open and attacking over it
for 2.5 hours. Does the packet filter not apply to
On Thu, 26 Feb 2015 18:25:49 +0100
Otto Moerbeek o...@drijf.net wrote:
On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 12:11:34PM -0500, Ted Unangst wrote:
Yes, that's how stateful firewalls work. Existing states don't
evaluate the ruleset. You probably want to look into pfctl -k.
The OP has a no state on the
Ahh, great.. thanks for clarifying.
Also, do you know when the developers (maybe Henning) are planning on making
the queue system 64bit so we can define queues greater in size than 4294Mbps?
Am I right in thinking that once we do move to a 64bit queue system, there will
also be better
On February 26, 2015 7:36:08 PM CET, halimsr...@gmail.com wrote:
I was upgrading my system today to the most recent snapshot (from a
previous snapshot). The Upgrade process failed (After booting bsd.rd),
with error 'uid 0 on /: file system full'
I finally found out that the problem was that my
On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 01:53:38PM -0500, D'Arcy J.M. Cain wrote:
On Thu, 26 Feb 2015 18:25:49 +0100
Otto Moerbeek o...@drijf.net wrote:
On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 12:11:34PM -0500, Ted Unangst wrote:
Yes, that's how stateful firewalls work. Existing states don't
evaluate the ruleset. You
Alexander Hall alexan...@beard.se writes:
On February 26, 2015 7:36:08 PM CET, halimsr...@gmail.com wrote:
I was upgrading my system today to the most recent snapshot (from a
previous snapshot). The Upgrade process failed (After booting bsd.rd),
with error 'uid 0 on /: file system full'
I
Naim, Halim. wrote:
Alexander Hall alexan...@beard.se writes:
On February 26, 2015 7:36:08 PM CET, halimsr...@gmail.com wrote:
I was upgrading my system today to the most recent snapshot (from a
previous snapshot). The Upgrade process failed (After booting bsd.rd),
with error 'uid 0 on /:
So I don't know what was the problem, but I know that wasn't with openbsd.
Like somebody said before, you were running OpenBSD -frankenstein flavour.
On Thu, 26 Feb 2015 21:49:15 +0100
Otto Moerbeek o...@drijf.net wrote:
What are you looking for specifically? I thought I posted all the
relevant rules and outputs. In particular I showed that the
problem IP was in the AUTOBLOCK table with pfctl -tAUTOBLOCK -Ts.
Well, from what you
On Thu, 26 Feb 2015 15:22:36 -0500
Ted Unangst t...@tedunangst.com wrote:
Well, there's what should happen and what does happen. The behavior
described sounds a lot like it's keeping state. You can check with
pfctl -ss.
all udp 98.158.139.74:5060 - 207.35.13.14:5060 MULTIPLE:MULTIPLE
On 02/26/2015 06:06 PM, patrick keshishian wrote:
On 2/26/15, Ulf Brosziewskiulf.brosziew...@t-online.de wrote:
On 02/26/2015 02:32 AM, patrick keshishian wrote:
On 2/25/15, Ulf Brosziewskiulf.brosziew...@t-online.de wrote:
...
Hi Patrick,
thanks for the reply. What I meant was this:
Am 2015-02-23 15:59, schrieb Joel Roberts:
My recent experience with OpenBSD under Xen ran into some problems.
First,
SMP didn't work. At the point in kernel boot where it brings up the
other
CPUs it would die. Installation of the OS worked because it used a
non-SMP
kernel. Second, once I
On 02/26/2015 02:32 AM, patrick keshishian wrote:
On 2/25/15, Ulf Brosziewskiulf.brosziew...@t-online.de wrote:
On 02/25/2015 11:53 PM, patrick keshishian wrote:
Hi,
On 2/25/15, joshua steinj...@openbsd.org wrote:
On Tue, 24 Feb 2015 at 12:32:10 -0800, patrick keshishian wrote:
I'm
Checked my usb system on radeon hd 5700 machine and it works fine with 1920
x 1080. So i think i will swap video cards, cuz that computer uses windows
anyway.
2015-02-25 12:54 GMT+03:00 Joseph Oficre seran...@gmail.com:
Dem, fixed it, and x server started, but in 1024x768 mode. Trying to add
Hi,
Does anyone have any idea why I can't do this anymore?
queue trunk_root on $if_trunk bandwidth $downstream
queue qlocal on $if_trunk parent trunk_root bandwidth 99%
queue local_kern on $if_trunk parent qlocal bandwidth 1% min 1%
queue local_pri on $if_trunk parent qlocal
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 09:08:56PM -0300, Henrique Lengler wrote:
On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 12:23:54PM +0100, Stefan Sperling wrote:
On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 02:30:06PM +0400, Evgeny Zhavoronkov wrote:
Ok. So I tried -current and situation is the same.
I can reproduce the total crash (laptop
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 03:17:09PM -0600, Andrew Daugherity wrote:
[...]
the VM config files. I did have to use model=e1000 for OpenBSD, as the
rtl8139 (re0 on openbsd) didn't work properly; I just now tested
rtl8139 emulation is from qemu, you would get same issue with qemu,
KVM... Thus, qemu
On 2/26/15, Ulf Brosziewski ulf.brosziew...@t-online.de wrote:
On 02/26/2015 06:06 PM, patrick keshishian wrote:
On 2/26/15, Ulf Brosziewskiulf.brosziew...@t-online.de wrote:
On 02/26/2015 02:32 AM, patrick keshishian wrote:
On 2/25/15, Ulf Brosziewskiulf.brosziew...@t-online.de wrote:
...
On 02/26/2015 01:19 PM, Ted Unangst wrote:
Naim, Halim. wrote:
Alexander Hall alexan...@beard.se writes:
On February 26, 2015 7:36:08 PM CET, halimsr...@gmail.com wrote:
I was upgrading my system today to the most recent snapshot (from a
previous snapshot). The Upgrade process failed (After
D'Arcy J.M. Cain wrote:
On Thu, 26 Feb 2015 15:22:36 -0500
Ted Unangst t...@tedunangst.com wrote:
Well, there's what should happen and what does happen. The behavior
described sounds a lot like it's keeping state. You can check with
pfctl -ss.
all udp 98.158.139.74:5060 -
pass in log on $ext_if proto udp from any to any port 5060 no state
I didn't see anywhere in pf.conf(5) that shows no state as an option.
On Thu, 26 Feb 2015 14:53:28 -0800
Philip Guenther guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 2:40 PM, Edgar Pettijohn
ed...@pettijohn-web.com wrote:
pass in log on $ext_if proto udp from any to any port 5060 no state
I didn't see anywhere in pf.conf(5) that shows no state as an
On 02/26/2015 11:12 PM, patrick keshishian wrote:
On 2/26/15, Ulf Brosziewskiulf.brosziew...@t-online.de wrote:
On 02/26/2015 06:06 PM, patrick keshishian wrote:
On 2/26/15, Ulf Brosziewskiulf.brosziew...@t-online.de wrote:
On 02/26/2015 02:32 AM, patrick keshishian wrote:
On 2/25/15, Ulf
On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 2:40 PM, Edgar Pettijohn
ed...@pettijohn-web.com wrote:
pass in log on $ext_if proto udp from any to any port 5060 no state
I didn't see anywhere in pf.conf(5) that shows no state as an option.
Hmm? It's *first* mention is on line 139 of the manpage:
pass The
On 02/27/2015 03:31 AM, Ulf Brosziewski wrote:
...
It might be that the following patch to wsmouse.c solves the problem
with the new version of wsconscomm. Tests would be welcome (I could
only verify that the patch does no harm to other touchpad types, i.e.,
Elantech-v4 and Alps Glidepoint).
On 02/25/2015 11:53 PM, patrick keshishian wrote:
Hi,
On 2/25/15, joshua steinj...@openbsd.org wrote:
On Tue, 24 Feb 2015 at 12:32:10 -0800, patrick keshishian wrote:
I'm noticing slight annoyance with recent update from 20141121
snapshot to 20150217.
My touchpad, while two-finger scrolling
On Thu, 26 Feb 2015 17:02:48 -0500
Ted Unangst t...@tedunangst.com wrote:
all udp 98.158.139.74:5060 - 207.35.13.14:5060
MULTIPLE:MULTIPLE
What does MULTIPLE:MULTIPLE mean?
multiple packets have passed, in both directions. i.e., you have a
state.
And yet;
# pfctl -vv -sr | grep sip
On 26 Feb 2015 at 23:16, D'Arcy J.M. Cain wrote:
On Thu, 26 Feb 2015 17:02:48 -0500
Ted Unangst t...@tedunangst.com wrote:
all udp 98.158.139.74:5060 - 207.35.13.14:5060
MULTIPLE:MULTIPLE
What does MULTIPLE:MULTIPLE mean?
multiple packets have passed, in both directions. i.e.,
38 matches
Mail list logo
