On September 15, 2017 4:06:37 AM GMT+02:00, "tec...@protonmail.com"
wrote:
>Hello,
>
>I'm using 6.1 + all updates (system and packages)
>
>I am trying to list a particular directory exactly as shown within the
>https://www.jp.openbsd.org/papers/httpd-slides-asiabsdcon2015.pdf
>presentation:
>
>
Hello,
I'm using 6.1 + all updates (system and packages)
I am trying to list a particular directory exactly as shown within the
https://www.jp.openbsd.org/papers/httpd-slides-asiabsdcon2015.pdf presentation:
location "/download/*" {
directory auto index
log style combined
}
This just results i
No Idea - I've been using tlsdate ( https://github.com/ioerror/tlsdate )
inside my Cloud VM images recently to set initial time as a lot of the
time ntp traffic is firewalled. Whereas there is generally a https source
you can reach from inside locked down networks.
On 15 September 2017 at 03:46
Hello,
this is what Janne Johansson said in the earlier message:
"Since 6.1 I think the max is 2M, and not 256k."
Therefore, not surprised if 4MB will fail.
--
Regards,
Ville
On 14 September 2017 at 21:30, Andreas Krüger wrote:
> I do manage to read the manual, but let me clarify this. I am no
On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 12:55:17AM +0700, Kamil Shakirov wrote:
> Hello Mike,
>
> I apologize for the late reply, I found this email in my spambox :(.
>
> After reporting this issue I had to move back to OpenBSD 6.1-stable where it
> works because I needed GNU/Linux VM for my development. I w
Nick Holland wrote:
> At this point, I think it is fair to say i386 has entered "legacy"
> state. I think it would be fair to say that the most active development
> is taking place on the amd64 platform and being pushed out to others. I
> think that's a better reason than performance.
Wasn't it
-w1M works for me
-
Andreas Kr??ger [a...@patientsky.com] wrote:
> I do manage to read the manual, but let me clarify this. I am not
> allowed to set a buffer larger than 256KB with iperf:
>
> $ uname -a
> OpenBSD odn1-fw-odn1-01 6.0 GENERIC.MP#0 amd64
>
> $ iperf -s -w 256KB
> --
I do manage to read the manual, but let me clarify this. I am not
allowed to set a buffer larger than 256KB with iperf:
$ uname -a
OpenBSD odn1-fw-odn1-01 6.0 GENERIC.MP#0 amd64
$ iperf -s -w 256KB
Server listening on TCP port 5001
TCP
On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 07:24:32PM +0200, Michael Hekeler wrote:
> > The difference in RAM usage on boot is something around a dozen
> > megabytes. You won't notice this.
>
> I think so, too
>
>
> > The only good reason to run i386 is if your system doesn't support
> > amd64.
>
> ++
Important
Hello Mike,
I apologize for the late reply, I found this email in my spambox :(.
After reporting this issue I had to move back to OpenBSD 6.1-stable where it
works because I needed GNU/Linux VM for my development. I will try again the
CURRENT next week and report back again.
Thanks!
> On
ipsec tunnels don't use TCP
iperf has the -w option
Andreas Kr??ger [a...@patientsky.com] wrote:
> How would i set i for ipsec tunnels or iperf etc. then?
> ANDREAS KR??GER
> CTO Hosting and Infrastructure
>
> +45 51808863
> a...@patientsky.com
>
>
>
> PatientSky AS
> Hovfaret 17 B, NO-0275 O
Once you get to OCTEON III class with -current, software FP emulation
is no longer at play. Ubiquiti Edgerouter 4, 6 and Infinity all fit this class.
4 to 16 cores. Not bad.
Martijn van Duren [openbsd+m...@list.imperialat.at] wrote:
> On 09/13/17 22:28, Dante F. B. Col?? wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > I'm
> The difference in RAM usage on boot is something around a dozen
> megabytes. You won't notice this.
I think so, too
> The only good reason to run i386 is if your system doesn't support
> amd64.
++
Hi,
Does NTPDd supports "tinker panic 0" as the linux one?
On 14 September 2017 at 12:46, Joel Wirāmu Pauling
wrote:
> Run NTPd on the hypervisor and NTP client In VM. Run ntpdate at boot before
> starting NTPd on the client to ensure the stepping is not too far off
> first.
>
> On 14 Sep. 2017
Hi All,
Following on from my previous post.
I needed to reload our PF ruleset today (pfctl -vvsr show about 1270 rules
total FWIW).
As soon as I ran 'pfctl -f /etc/pf.conf' our external measurements showed a
lot of jitter through the firewall, previous to that jitter had been
minimal for hours - n
On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 9:43 AM, Mike Belopuhov wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 18:41 -0400, sven falempin wrote:
> > Feels like it s impossible to use virtual routing table without a
> rdomain
> > on interface with 6.1
> >
>
> I think you were relying on an arp(1) bug that influenced your
> un
Run NTPd on the hypervisor and NTP client In VM. Run ntpdate at boot before
starting NTPd on the client to ensure the stepping is not too far off
first.
On 14 Sep. 2017 11:35 pm, "Aaron Marcher" wrote:
Hi all,
I have a weird problem on my OpenBSD server. It is a virtualized guest
under QEMU-KVM
I have a virtually identical setup on my primary laptop (i5 540M, 8GB RAM)
running amd64 and my netbook (Atom N455, 2GB RAM) running i386. The
difference in RAM usage on boot is something around a dozen megabytes. You
won't notice this. The only good reason to run i386 is if your system
doesn't sup
2017-09-14 13:24 GMT+02:00 Andreas Krüger :
> How would i set i for ipsec tunnels or iperf etc. then?
IPSec isn't using tcp so you wouldn't be able to.
For iperf, you can read the manpage, like I have done for httpd/rsync.
-w, --window n[KM]
TCP window size (socket buffer si
Hi all,
I have a weird problem on my OpenBSD server. It is a virtualized guest
under QEMU-KVM. Apperently time management is completely off. With HPET
and normal HW-clock the command "time sleep 1" shows a little bit more
than a second after a fresh boot. After a few hours the result is about
How would i set i for ipsec tunnels or iperf etc. then?
ANDREAS KRÜGER
CTO Hosting and Infrastructure
+45 51808863
a...@patientsky.com
PatientSky AS
Hovfaret 17 B, NO-0275 Oslo, Norway
patientsky.com
2017-09-14 13:10 GMT+02:00 Janne Johansson :
>
> 2017-09-14 13:08 GMT+02:00 Janne Johansson
2017-09-14 13:08 GMT+02:00 Janne Johansson :
> Since 6.1 I think the max is 2M, and not 256k. Many programs will also
> allow you to bump limits using setsockopt.
>
>
>
httpd.conf:
server "secret.site" {
tcp {
socket buffer 2097152
}
rsyncd.conf:
...
socke
Since 6.1 I think the max is 2M, and not 256k. Many programs will also
allow you to bump limits using setsockopt.
2017-09-14 11:15 GMT+02:00 Andreas Krüger :
> Hi All,
>
> I am wondering why there is no option to set the max tcp window
> scaling sizes for send and receive since version 4.9.
> I
Rpartition des postes :
Terrain : 74 000
Notaire : 7 000 (estimation qui m' a t fournie)
Frais Agence : Aucun
Construction: 132 104
--> Ici les postes peuvent être revus car estimés (cuisine, clorture,
superficie...)
Apport envisagé de mon coté : 8 000 € (Frais de notaires + Frais Bancaires
Hi All,
I am wondering why there is no option to set the max tcp window
scaling sizes for send and receive since version 4.9.
I saw in the change log, that it was converted to auto scaling, but
the max values are now hardcoded and removed from sysctl, for some
reason?
The problem is, I have two O
> Regarding OS and ports performance, does it make sense to use i386
> rather than amd64 ?
What is the meaning of "OS and ports performance"?
Do you have concerns about the memory usage? Maybe we can say:
AMD64 installs will always use more RAM than i386, so if you are low on
RAM, then i386 will
26 matches
Mail list logo
