Re: EuroBSDCon 2009, Cambridge, UK
If that is the only alternative case to cut quixotic attendance expenses specially in today's financial situations, then why not let everybody be the speaker? Let everyone deliver their speeches of good tidings and change that we can believe in about OBSD from newbies to not newbies. Maybe we'll invite Borat and Mr. Bean to give the attendees some free refreshing laughs at all, that is, if they are laughable at all. :wq! On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 8:52 PM, Edd Barrettvex...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 11:17:22PM +0100, Fred Crowson wrote: I've paid for my ticket - this will be my nearest EuroBSD Conference - I'll not need a flight to this one :~) It's tempting, but oh so expensive. It's a lot cheaper if you give a talk. :)
Re: EuroBSDCon 2009, Cambridge, UK
And so I've heard from a very extremely reliable assets not parasites that the following will also gawk at the gathering: 1. Borat 2. Mr. Bean 3. James Bond :wq! hmm, on Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 08:21:16PM +0200, ropers said that Please don't require me to submit myself to facefuck in order to see it's not facefuck. it's fuckbook. -f -- so easy, a child can do it. child sold seperately.
Re: Open Vs Free BSD
Oh why can't this versus this versus that never dies? There had been raging debate about which OSes is much better compared to the others since time immemorial. Sure, each one has its own merits over the others and vice versa. So why feeding this issue up since up to this very moment, there is no winner. and the security is in netbsd: http://netbsd.gw.com/cgi-bin/man-cgi?security+8+NetBSD-5.0 http://www.netbsd.org/~elad/recent/recent06.pdf On 6/19/09, Ivan Voras ivo...@freebsd.org wrote: Kim Attree wrote: NetBSD runs on just about anything. That's it's primary goal. Since I don't have any weird hardware, I've never had a use for NetBSD. I don't use NetBSD either but some recent development that come from that camp are very interesting: * Journalling UFS (smart journalling, not gjournal) * PUFFS (BSD implementation of FUSE-like system [file system in userland]) * They had Xen dom0 and domU for years * They are starting to show decent results in SMP support, including a new scheduler (a bit similar to ULE); their GENERIC has SMP included * Possibly superpages, I'm not sure how to parse Merged amd64 and i386 pmap. Large pages are always used if available * I think they are working on their own ZFS port * They have ported or reimplemented Linux LVM (read+write+admin) There are of course other things; see for example http://www.netbsd.org/releases/formal-5/NetBSD-5.0.html I have a feeling the project has been revitalized in the last few years. ___ freebsd-sta...@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re:
Hi this is bob. really. I can haz Ur Passwordz plz? ohai, and Ur bank accountz and sinz too? Hi sure why not. Here are mine: Username: lowboot Password: oten Bank Account: xxx-007
Re: MPLS On OpenBGP
Will it be likely possible and feasible to add MPLS feature on OpenBGPd?
Re: MPLS On OpenBGP
I'll be looking for that day wherein those Cisco guys can boost no more that they are the only ones in the planet that has the MPLS skills. Whew, maybe somebody knows where to start on how to add this MPLS feature so as to answer the question like where do I begin? On Wed, Aug 06, 2008 at 03:17:41PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Will it be likely possible and feasible to add MPLS feature on OpenBGPd? Yes. It is neither impossible nor unfeasible. But don't ask when it will happen unless you like to do the work. -- :wq Claudio
Re: pf openbsd 4.2 machine stopped responding
I encountered this kind of situation before. From what I experienced, it was some sort of a thing that the memory suddenly freezes all the running processes. I can even remember that I saw something like db I did tried changing a different machine with the same hard disk still there was a point in time that the machine just suddenly halted. To sort it out, I migrated to 4.3 and I got an OpenBSD running seamlessly. Hi, I have an openbsd 4.2 pf firewall using a generic, multiprocessor kernel that has been running with no issues for 101 days. Yesterday it stopped forwarding traffic and stopped allowing me to log on via ssh. Unfortunately, although it stopped forwarding traffic, it didn't fail over to its CARP standby node. We forced a failover by shutting down one of its switch ports. Now when I try to log on over the serial port I get the following message: 'internal resource failure'. First question: We have the machine left in its failed state at the moment. Is there a signal I can send it over the serial port to get the machine to panic before rebooting it (to give us as much information as possible)? (More questions to follow no doubt!) Thanks in advance, Cliff.
Re: running mail server at home
Absolutely, there is nothing hard about it and in fact it is very stupidly simple. Preaching about reverse lookups for these purposes is a sort of masochistic ignorance. I don't do reverse dns and most people get my email just fine. If you don't I probably don't care enough to hear about it. I have 5 static IPs at home that resolve. Nothing hard about it; I just refuse to pay $5/month for reverse lookups. On Thu, Feb 07, 2008 at 09:38:30AM -0600, L. V. Lammert wrote: On Thu, 7 Feb 2008, Douglas A. Tutty wrote: On Thu, Feb 07, 2008 at 02:51:31AM -0800, Chris wrote: I have a P3 box with 120GB HDD that's doing web, ssh and samba at the moment. I am planning setup sendmail, spamd, mimedefang, clamd and spam-assassin on this box along with web, ssh and samba. I was wondering if anyone has any experience with running a mail server at home. In reality, you cannot run your own mail server at home. This would require: 1) DNS resolution for your domain name 2) Appropriate MX records 3) Valid REVERSE DNS for your IP #3 is usually the big factor for most ISPS, without it, you will not be able to send email to any 'sane' mail server. Lee Leland V. Lammert[EMAIL PROTECTED] Chief Scientist Omnitec Corporation Network/Internet Consultants www.omnitec.net
Re: running mail server at home
Reliably? I been running it for 3 years already without single incident that those damn e-mails I'd sent reached their destinations at all. At 04:43 PM 2/7/2008 +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You can absolutely run a mail server at home. This is not rocket science and in fact, it is dumb easy to do. Try to follow these steps: 1. Get a domain name and look for registrars that can host it for you. For example, check this kind of services at www.no-ip.com. 2. Configure your ADSL router to re-direct SMTP and POP3 traffic to that server of yours running sendmail, spamd, mimedefang, clamd, spam-assassin, etc. You can even incorporate services like IMAP3 for you to be able to log-in into your mail server anywhere. Please stop spreading misinformation. Unless you have reverse DNS setup, ANY email server that adhering to standards should (and probably will) block your incoming email. If you want to run your own, that's great, but don't expect to use it reliably without either setting up the reverse DNS or forwarding through your ISPs email server(s). If you don't do that, you won't know be able to have any assurance that your email will be received properly. Lee
Re: running mail server at home
Either you want to send or receive mail from anyone and from anywhere in cyberspace, that is irrefutably possible. Like I said, consider this site: www.no-ip.com I am not working for them but I had used their affordable services and it works well. One thing, if your ADSL router at home has either a dynamic or a public static IPv4 address your purpose is very doable. The keyword here is redirection. FYI, masquerading is a LINUX shit but openbsd rules with its PF power. On Thu, Feb 07, 2008 at 02:51:31AM -0800, Chris wrote: I have a P3 box with 120GB HDD that's doing web, ssh and samba at the moment. I am planning setup sendmail, spamd, mimedefang, clamd and spam-assassin on this box along with web, ssh and samba. I was wondering if anyone has any experience with running a mail server at home. I want to know if I should use only one box or buy another box? Also, what sort of electricity bills will I run into? And also if is there anything else I would need to know. Thanks for any help. Well, as always, it depends. What do _you_ mean by a mail server? Do you mean that you want people to mail you directly and your mail to go out to the internet directly and bypass your ISP? If so, you'll need a fixed IP and help from you ISP since they normall block this for home users. Hey, my ISP says that their connection is only for one computer that I can't run a network on their hookup. I guess they've never heard of UNIX and masquerading. I run a mailserver in that I can mail internally and externally. However, the mail all goes out to my ISP's smart host and comes in with fetchmail. Doug.
Re: running mail server at home
If your ISP is blocking port 25, port 110, and port 143 both ways maybe it is high-time you consider changing internet service provider. There is no point paying them good money when what they are doing is basically blocking ports here and there. On Thu, Feb 07, 2008 at 09:38:30AM -0600, L. V. Lammert wrote: In reality, you cannot run your own mail server at home. This would require: 1) DNS resolution for your domain name 2) Appropriate MX records 3) Valid REVERSE DNS for your IP #3 is usually the big factor for most ISPS, without it, you will not be able to send email to any 'sane' mail server. I have all of those on a home ADSL connection, although I doubt you can get that from many ISPs, mine is about 20% more expensive than the cheap ones and didn't even offer non-static IPs until about a year ago. If you use your ISP's smarthost you can probably get away without reverse DNS, I doubt mail servers are going to leave their mail undelivered because the receiving MX is in a dialup range. BTW, you forgot 4), the biggest obstacle with residential ISPs: blocking of port 25 both ways, which is luckily becoming more and more common, even to the point were the telecommunications regulation authority here officially recommends it to ISPs. Love the spammers and stupid users... -- Jussi Peltola
Re: running mail server at home
You can absolutely run a mail server at home. This is not rocket science and in fact, it is dumb easy to do. Try to follow these steps: 1. Get a domain name and look for registrars that can host it for you. For example, check this kind of services at www.no-ip.com. 2. Configure your ADSL router to re-direct SMTP and POP3 traffic to that server of yours running sendmail, spamd, mimedefang, clamd, spam-assassin, etc. You can even incorporate services like IMAP3 for you to be able to log-in into your mail server anywhere. On Thu, 7 Feb 2008, Douglas A. Tutty wrote: On Thu, Feb 07, 2008 at 02:51:31AM -0800, Chris wrote: I have a P3 box with 120GB HDD that's doing web, ssh and samba at the moment. I am planning setup sendmail, spamd, mimedefang, clamd and spam-assassin on this box along with web, ssh and samba. I was wondering if anyone has any experience with running a mail server at home. In reality, you cannot run your own mail server at home. This would require: 1) DNS resolution for your domain name 2) Appropriate MX records 3) Valid REVERSE DNS for your IP #3 is usually the big factor for most ISPS, without it, you will not be able to send email to any 'sane' mail server. Lee Leland V. Lammert[EMAIL PROTECTED] Chief Scientist Omnitec Corporation Network/Internet Consultants www.omnitec.net
Re: running mail server at home
Spreading misinformation? Look, I subscribe to an ISP with ADSL that provided me with public dynamic IP address. I register it to a registrar that offers dynamic hosting courtesy of www.no-ip.com and I am sending this email to you because of it. And you tell me that I am preaching something not doable? Oh common At 04:43 PM 2/7/2008 +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You can absolutely run a mail server at home. This is not rocket science and in fact, it is dumb easy to do. Try to follow these steps: 1. Get a domain name and look for registrars that can host it for you. For example, check this kind of services at www.no-ip.com. 2. Configure your ADSL router to re-direct SMTP and POP3 traffic to that server of yours running sendmail, spamd, mimedefang, clamd, spam-assassin, etc. You can even incorporate services like IMAP3 for you to be able to log-in into your mail server anywhere. Please stop spreading misinformation. Unless you have reverse DNS setup, ANY email server that adhering to standards should (and probably will) block your incoming email. If you want to run your own, that's great, but don't expect to use it reliably without either setting up the reverse DNS or forwarding through your ISPs email server(s). If you don't do that, you won't know be able to have any assurance that your email will be received properly. Lee
Re: SMDR port
WTF this has to do with being in misc@openbsd.org mailing lists? [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb: I am trying to get information about the SMDR port on the S8700. I am attempting to run dual outputs from this IP system. Can you comment on this or direct me to where I can obtain additional information? Philip Colaluca- BT Americas CSNO Group-Unilever Account office 203-402-4550, Cell:203-470-9075 Fax- 203-402-4502 There is a chapter on cdr or 'call detail recording' in the 'feature description and implementation guide' that you can find on the documentation cd delivered with your acm system, or online at avaya.com. Hope that helps but what has this got to do with this list? Regards, Dorian
Re: In Memoriam: Jun-ichiro Hagino
Physically, Itojun has gone from this temporal earthly life. But, IMHO, it won't be too long that his legacy in the IPV6 arena will be of immense adaptations and benefits to the internet community. Hence, the legend of the great gentle samurai hacker will always be honored forevermore. Hi! On Sat, Nov 03, 2007 at 01:45:57AM +0100, Gilbert Fernandes wrote: Dragos Ruiu a icrit : With great sadness, I regret to inform you that Itojun will not be presenting his great knowledge of IPv6 at PacSec. I have been informed by several sources that he passed away yesterday. This is very sad. Indeed. I just spent some time watching again all his youtube videos and the second one.. he talks of how ipv6 should be wide enough so we should not run out of addresses, not in his lifetime. And then he added that he hoped it would of course not be too short. Seeing this video is strange. Itojun was someone very friendly. And I mean it. Years ago I worked as a journalist for a french magazine called Login (it no longer does exist now, its mother company has gone bankrupt). For one of the issues, I had to write a big paper on Ipv6 and Itojun was, with a France Telecom ingineer specialized in ipv6 and working from Belgium, the one person that answered first when I was looking for advices and links on Internet. Itojun spent a lot of time searching and sending me documentation. Later, I learned that he had to get up early the next day but nonetheless he spent several hours in the night looking for information and writing some for me just for helping me on that paper. Itojun just did it, and didnt even talked about his half night because of this. He was someone gentle and kind and did efforts for others, and without even talking about it. Learning now that he is gone is very sad. *nods* Thanks for that memory. A few years later I remember Itojun receiving from someone on one of the openbsd's mailing list a rather rude answer. I did interverne and tried to tell that person he should be more cautious of his talk because he obviously didnt do his homework before being rude to Itojun (if I remember correctly it was after a commit and something was not working perfectly after). Itojun again did not publically answer his feelings, but I remember receiving from him an email later, in private. We do meet rude people or even morons from time to time (especially in openbsd-misc, you know what I mean right ?) and this event did make something to Itojun. I could feel it really hurt him to see someone react with so much rudeness after a commit and having spent time working for the whole community. He was puzzled and really did not understand the whole thing got out of proportion like that. *sigh* Sad, indeed. Hope it helped him that at least you stood openly behind him. I spent some time after this accident talking with him and telling him about his code and snippets I had seen, and taking some fresh news since our last email exchanges for my ipv6 paper. Only talked with him twice to say, and I will never forget his kindness and being very discrete about his efforts when having to help someone just because you shared something he did like to work upon. Goodbye Itojun. Kind regards, Hannah.
Re: Remembering Jun-ichiro Hagino
Perhaps, its better to remember the life and legacy of this samurai hacker. His website maybe of interest as shown below: http://www.itojun.org/itojun.html .*, DI Bendano Thats sad man. He was still active 10/25 $Id: index.html,v 1.32 2007/10/25 06:28:10 itojun Exp $ http://ipv6samurais.com/ipv6samurais/ I noticed on his videos he was always coughing. Must be a respiratory ailment. May he rest in peace. On 10/30/07, Dragos Ruiu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: With great sadness, I regret to inform you that Itojun will not be presenting his great knowledge of IPv6 at PacSec. I have been informed by several sources that he passed away yesterday. Funeral services will be held on Nov 7th at Rinkai-Saijo in Tokyo. There aren't many details of his passing, so please let his family and relatives mourn in peace for now. My heartfelt condolances go out to them, and all of his many friends. I knew Itojun as one of the smartest and kindest persons I have ever met. He helped everyone around him. He graciously hosted and assisted many foreigners new to Japan at the PacSec conferences, and was a good friend to all. He would go to extraordinary lengths to help anyone around him. We will all miss him - and his work on IPv6 will continue to help us for a long time.. He once said to me, When a professional race car driver races, his pulse gets lower and he relaxes. When I code it is the same thing. I'll miss him driving around in his prized Fiat 500... and I hope we can all proceed to help fix our V6 networks without his gentle, brilliant, and insistent coaching... If you knew or respected him, he would have wanted any energy you put towards grief to be spent on speeding the adoption and the robustness of the version 6 internet to which he devoted so much of his extraordinary life to. Some more information in Japanese at http://www.hoge.org/~koyama/itojun.txt May he rest in peace, --dr -- World Security Pros. Cutting Edge Training, Tools, and Techniques Tokyo, JapanNovember 29/30 - 2007http://pacsec.jp pgpkey http://dragos.com/ kyxpgp
Re: How can I install 4 OS'es on one disk?
I taught this thread has alread been finished because it is just so simple and no brainer. Anyways, please follow this procedure: 1. Use a freeware disk partitioning software like GParted LiveCD to re-organize your hard disk to accomodate new arrangements. Usually, you want this software without recurring any re-installing of your default windows because it will just re-allocate in the new settings. 2. Then follow this hard disk lay-out. It work for me in the past several years without hassles. If possible, use fdisk to get the partition in its correct label. /dev/hda1 - windows (ntfs) -- no changes. /dev/hda2 - freebsd (a5) /dev/hda3 - linux (81) /dev/hda4 - openbsd (A6) 3. Use a boot manager. I highly recommend LILO as it is much easier to use. You will be fine if you follow that procedure. Ok? Best Regards, Demuel Siju George [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: 1) it is easier to get Windows installed on the beginning so you have less hassle. I'd amplify that even further. Of the systems mentioned, only Windows appears to work from the assumption that it will always be the only operating system on your machine. Install that first, just give it whatever space you think is appropriate, then proceed with the others and do whatever you can to hide the fact that it's not alone from Windows. The other systems are saner than Windows with respect to multiboot configurations, but in my experience life's generally less stressful if you can have one operating system per machine or enough resources to do good virtualisation. -- Peter N. M. Hansteen, member of the first RFC 1149 implementation team http://bsdly.blogspot.com/ http://www.datadok.no/ http://www.nuug.no/ Remember to set the evil bit on all malicious network traffic delilah spamd[29949]: 85.152.224.147: disconnected after 42673 seconds.
Re: Any OpenSBD users in Manchester UK?
What will you be doing here in UK? Hi, I have to come to U.K from 6th July to 15th July. It would be great if I can find a few OpenBSD users there and see how your implementations are :-) Please let me know your contact details off list. Also let me know if you need something from India :- if i can afford it I'll get it for you. I have never seen other architectures except x86, amd64, PPC ( thanks to e-mac ). Yes I saw a sparc system once but it was not connected to anything and a few people were around it in an institute trying to make heads and tails out of lump of metal and find the place where to connect the keyboard because it had no serial/ps2/usb ports. It would be great if I can see those other architectures like sparc64, VAX, arm etc and spend some time learning from experienced users :- I think this would be the best opportunity for that. Those things are rare if at all existent in this part of the sub continent. I have a tight schedule since I am coming there as part of my Job so I don't even know if I'll get free time on weekends but surely don't want to miss the chance of seeing you people and these machines if the Lord permits :-) If the trip were to Paris I would have gone to the house of Johan Sanchez :-) who has a whole lot of different architectures. And if the trip were to Canada I would stay at Theo's place and give him some bright Ideas ;-) Germany? Henning of course :- US? Nick or JCR :-)) Thank you so much Kind Regards Siju
Re: Any OpenSBD users in Manchester UK?
Hmm, are there no competent OpenBSD user/programmer/administrator/whatever in the UK? They should inform me, I been into OpenBSD since 2.6 and now they have to import someone from a different timezone just to do that while I am here basically several hours by train -). That is not classified anymore. Just be careful, security here might be a tougher one in the airport due to a foiled terrorist attack earlier today at the heart of Central London. Thank you so much Darrin and Michael for your responses :-) Hope I will be lucky enough to have time and oppourtunity. On 6/29/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What will you be doing here in UK? Well... Well.. Now who told you to ask that question? :-) I carefully avoided that in the previous mail ! I am coming there to install a BSD firewall for a client. They need a GUI, that is a must. So it is not our favourite OS. It is pfSense :-) I will have to train them how to use it too. Besides we did develop some demo application for them in MS technologies. So will be doing the demo installation of that as well and some training on that too. Ok keep it secret. it is classified information :-) Thanks for asking any ways Kind regards Siju
Re: rdr outgoing traffic
what is 192.168.1.10 then? Hello. I have machine with one interface pcn0 and ip 192.168.1.7 and I was trying to redirect outgoing traffic from it with no success. My pf rule: rdr on pcn0 inet proto tcp from pcn0 to 192.168.1.1 port 80 - 192.168.1.10 When I do telnet 192.168.1.1 80 it doesn't redirect traffic. What am I doing wrong? Thanks in advance. -- RafaE Brodewicz
Re: Sometime NAT, sometimes NOT?
Maybe try to check and possibly replace the interfaces involve as well as the cables and let us know if this issue still occur. pfctl -x loud tail -f /var/log/messages ~BAS On Mon, 11 Jun 2007, Geraerts Andy wrote: We have an OpenBSD firewall running for a while now. Since a few days we encounter some sort of selective natting. I try to ping a host, I get reply, and 2 minutes later I try to ping the same host and I dont get replies. So despite the state being created in both instances, you see a packet egress your external interface with the source address of the internal host instead of the external interface of the NAT box? We indeed see the state being created. The packet egresses on the external interface without NAT. So the ip packet contains the source ip address of my laptop and therefor further on the path gets blocked because it isn't natted. A few seconds/minutes later I try again and everything works again. Is there a way to see why it isn't doing the NAT? (There are around 80 interfaces (vlan + carp) on the box.) Regards, Andy. No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.13/843 - Release Date: 10/06/2007 13:39 __ This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager at : [EMAIL PROTECTED] or call +32-(0)11-240234. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by Sophos for the presence of computer viruses. __ l8* -lava (Brian A. Seklecki - Pittsburgh, PA, USA) http://www.spiritual-machines.org/ Guilty? Yeah. But he knows it. I mean, you're guilty. You just don't know it. So who's really in jail? ~Maynard James Keenan
Re: dhcp server with 2 interfaces and 2 different subnets
Hello,
Your current /etc/dhcpd.conf configuration will not work no matter how hard you
test it
. Hint? You should not create a shared-network amongst two different ip blocks
and
rather instead allocate a specific subnet per ip blocks. Trust me, this will
work
because I been there done that.
Demuel
Hi,
I am trying to setup a DHCP server on a multi-homed firewall. One of the
interfaces is vr0 and should supply addresses 172.16.255.x/24. The other
is sk0 and should supply 200.232.140.x/24.
My /etc/dhcpd.interfaces looks like
sk0
vr0
My /etc/dhcpd.conf looks like
shared-network LOCAL-NET {
option domain-name-servers 200.232.140.1;
subnet 200.232.140.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 {
option routers 200.232.140.1;
range 200.232.140.20 200.232.140.200;
}
subnet 172.16.255.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 {
option routers 172.16.255.1;
range 172.16.255.20 172.16.255.200;
}
}
Now how can I tell the dhcp server to only allocate 172.16.255
addresses to vr0 and 200.232.140.0 to sk0?
Thank you very much.
Jeff
--
Get a Free E-mail Account at Mail.com!
Choose From 100+ Personalized Domains
Visit http://www.mail.com today
Re: OpenBSD and Kerberos Client
This must be another troll wandering in the Docklands area. Signal to Noise ratio high in your last post. You think you trim some of the fat from your e-mails in your future posts? In your last e-mail you had a 4 line replay and 30 lines telling me how to locate you, get in touch with you via snail mail, tele, FAX and e-mail. Also, it was apparent the list subscribers needed to know all about the great services your employer provides AND THEN you have the audacity to tell all of us it's confidential and should consider the environment before printing this e-mail.! g.day
Re: OpenBSD and Kerberos Client
Maybe he is trying to impress anyone, specially UK-based openbsd misc
subscribers, in a
meditative way possible that he works for a company in the Docklands?
Saying that configuring this is better and easier than Redhat Linux has no
place in
the OpenBSD mailing lists.
On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 03:16:06PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't have the audacity to do anything. The email signature is
defined through company policy and tacked on by the M$ Exchange
Server on the way out. I have no say and only see it when I get
replies to my email.
Have you considered getting a free mail account somewhere else and
using that for your non-work correspondence?
--
o--{ Will Maier }--o
| web:...http://www.lfod.us/ | [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
*--[ BSD Unix: Live Free or Die ]--*
Re: OpenBSD sucks
Hmm, a googlemail account. This message must perhaps be coming from a typical illiterate British idiot who thinks that Glory is to Britain and Grandeur is still again to Britain. I wonder what operating system does the British maintained and develop nowadays? And oh yeah, no doubt why he is a moron because their national hero of Great Britain is Mr. Bean. Mate, before you conclude anything related to openbsd credibility, used your brain and not your British dick. dems It really sucks. it is slow.
Media Proxy In OpenBSD
Hi, Just a taught. If there is proxying of FTP, is there any in existence what they called MEDIA proxying in OpenBSD? Regards, Demuel
Re: SIP on OpenBSD
In my opinion, if you could install asterisk+zaptel+libpri in openbsd, then I could not see any reason why you cannot get SIP running on it. Did anyone succeed in installing any SIP client on OpenBSD? CL
Re: SIP on OpenBSD
If zaptel won't work in openbsd, there is no way for asterisk be installed. Hence, no chance for any SIP protocol to work. But in case you want to get SIP running on the BSDs, I suggest you go over to FreeBSD. On Tue, Feb 13, 2007 at 09:57:20AM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In my opinion, if you could install asterisk+zaptel+libpri in openbsd, then I could not see any reason why you cannot get SIP running on it. Did anyone succeed in installing any SIP client on OpenBSD? The only problem is that we don't support zaptel. It is an incredible ugly interface that only works with the digium cards that are not supported. -- :wq Claudio
Re: SIP on OpenBSD
Unless zaptel is supported under the OpenbSD platform, then there is no way you can get sip protocol run on OpenBSD platform. I have read in the digium mailing lists that work is on the way in transferring the success of digium-based cards to either the NetBSD/OpenBSD. Claudio Jeker wrote: On Tue, Feb 13, 2007 at 09:57:20AM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In my opinion, if you could install asterisk+zaptel+libpri in openbsd, then I could not see any reason why you cannot get SIP running on it. Did anyone succeed in installing any SIP client on OpenBSD? The only problem is that we don't support zaptel. It is an incredible ugly interface that only works with the digium cards that are not supported. Also, the OP asked for a SIP client, not a about running a SIP server. AFAIk there are no SIP clients in the ports tree. --- Lars Hansson
Re: SIP on OpenBSD
I don't know for sure how you did it. But I been working with Asterisk+Zaptel+Libpri here in UK both for personnal and commercial VOIP applications. My success so far on the BSDs is with FreeBSD and never had any single damn problem. I have and reviewed the specs of digium over and over again that zaptel is the device driver for the NIC card that talks to the kernel. If you claimed that you made OpenBSD run asterisk, then that is something worthwhile to talk about. But as I could see, your setup is making your machine connecting to some other machine elsewhere. Well, in my opinion it would be nice if one could put zaptel+libpri+asterisk under one box just as a typical pabx. FYI, I do not used softphones and I prefer hardphones. On Tue, Feb 13, 2007 at 10:39:59AM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | If zaptel won't work in openbsd, there is no way for asterisk be installed. Hence, no chance for | any SIP protocol to work. But in case you want to get SIP running on the BSDs, I suggest you go | over to FreeBSD. I've been running a PBX with Asterisk and OpenBSD for quite some time now. I'm very happy with the resulting uptime and functionality. I've used an IAX softphone (LoudHush, MacOSX payware) and a few hardware SIP phones. It connects to a SIP provider in the Netherlands to connect to the rest of the world. No zaptel in my (sparc64) machine. I would also like a softphone (preferably IAX based, but SIP would be fine too I suppose) in the OpenBSD ports tree, but not having one does not make Asterisk on OpenBSD useless. Cheers, Paul 'WEiRD' de Weerd -- [++-]+++.+++[---].+++[+ +++-].++[-]+.--.[-] http://www.weirdnet.nl/
Re: SIP on OpenBSD
Well we have different experience and approaches. I want a VOIP PABX and I find it easier to play with voip telephony system if I have all what is listed as requirements on the asterisk website. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Unless zaptel is supported under the OpenbSD platform, then there is no way you can get sip protocol run on OpenBSD platform. There are software SIP clients, you know. Like Ekiga, KCall, KPhone etc. It's just that no one as ported them yet. SIP has NOTHING to do with zaptel and both Asterisk and SER are in the ports tree. zaptel is only required if you want to use digium cards to interface with a PBX or similar. --- Lars Hansson
Re: SIP on OpenBSD
I would rather design a PABX that could interface with existing non VOIP PABX at all. Again, this is about preference not advocacy. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: that zaptel is the device driver for the NIC card that talks to the kernel. No, it's the device driver/API for telephony (Digium and Tormenta) cards, not NIC cards. If you claimed that you made OpenBSD run asterisk, then that is something worthwhile to talk about. It's not a claim, it's a fact. It's in the ports tree and it works. But as I could see, your setup is making your machine connecting to some other machine elsewhere. That's what most VOIP systems do. Would be pretty pointless if it didnt communicate with other VOIP systems. Well, in my opinion it would be nice if one could put zaptel+libpri+asterisk under one box just as a typical pabx. And indeed the *only* thing missing on OpenBSD is the ability to interface directly with an *existing* non-VOIP PBX or non-VOIP phones. You can design and implement a perfectly functioning VOIP PBX on OpenBSD as long as you don't need the OpenBSD box to interface directly with a traditional PBX or telephone. FYI, I do not used softphones and I prefer hardphones. It's of no relevance, both works with Asterisk (and SER) on OpenBSD. --- Lars Hansson
Re: SIP in OpenBSD
If one's intention is to run just purely VOIP softphones and hardphones, the asterisk software alone is enough to do the job. Whereas, if you want to interface you machine to an existing old pabx or if you want your openbsd machine to work with pstn at your location then you need to get zaptel+libpri working on your machine.
Re: SIP on OpenBSD
It works if you intend that machine as VOIP only. But I don't think without zaptel/libpri, you can connect it to existing PABX or PSTN. It seems that you are not understanding * architecture well. As I know zaptel is required for analog FXO/FXS cards from digium and libpri for T1/E1 cards. But they have nothing to do with VoIP, which is SIP, IAX ... I have never ran asterisk on OBSD, but I believe it works (I mean asterisk only, no zaptel and libpri) Shohrukh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't know for sure how you did it. But I been working with Asterisk+Zaptel+Libpri here in UK both for personnal and commercial VOIP applications. My success so far on the BSDs is with FreeBSD and never had any single damn problem. I have and reviewed the specs of digium over and over again that zaptel is the device driver for the NIC card that talks to the kernel. If you claimed that you made OpenBSD run asterisk, then that is something worthwhile to talk about. But as I could see, your setup is making your machine connecting to some other machine elsewhere. Well, in my opinion it would be nice if one could put zaptel+libpri+asterisk under one box just as a typical pabx. FYI, I do not used softphones and I prefer hardphones. On Tue, Feb 13, 2007 at 10:39:59AM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | If zaptel won't work in openbsd, there is no way for asterisk be installed. Hence, no chance for | any SIP protocol to work. But in case you want to get SIP running on the BSDs, I suggest you go | over to FreeBSD. I've been running a PBX with Asterisk and OpenBSD for quite some time now. I'm very happy with the resulting uptime and functionality. I've used an IAX softphone (LoudHush, MacOSX payware) and a few hardware SIP phones. It connects to a SIP provider in the Netherlands to connect to the rest of the world. No zaptel in my (sparc64) machine. I would also like a softphone (preferably IAX based, but SIP would be fine too I suppose) in the OpenBSD ports tree, but not having one does not make Asterisk on OpenBSD useless. Cheers, Paul 'WEiRD' de Weerd -- [++-]+++.+++[---].+++[+ +++-].++[-]+.--.[-] http://www.weirdnet.nl/
Re: SIP in OpenBSD
whatever! On Tue, Feb 13, 2007 at 12:35:56PM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If one's intention is to run just purely VOIP softphones and hardphones, the asterisk software alone is enough to do the job. Whereas, if you want to interface you machine to an existing old pabx or if you want your openbsd machine to work with pstn at your location then you need to get zaptel+libpri working on your machine. This is not true, as several people have told you already. I myself run Asterisk on my openbsd box at home, and I have connected my PSTN line to it using a Sipura SPA-3000 instead of a zaptel card. It works just fine: *all* my calls are handled (PSTN/VoIP) by the Asterisk server. Now please stop posting nonsense. Thanks. -- Jurjen Oskam Savage's Law of Expediency: You want it bad, you'll get it bad.
Re: SIP in OpenBSD
bloody rubbish... On Tue, Feb 13, 2007 at 12:35:56PM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If one's intention is to run just purely VOIP softphones and hardphones, the asterisk software alone is enough to do the job. Whereas, if you want to interface you machine to an existing old pabx or if you want your openbsd machine to work with pstn at your location then you need to get zaptel+libpri working on your machine. This is not true, as several people have told you already. I myself run Asterisk on my openbsd box at home, and I have connected my PSTN line to it using a Sipura SPA-3000 instead of a zaptel card. It works just fine: *all* my calls are handled (PSTN/VoIP) by the Asterisk server. Now please stop posting nonsense. Thanks. -- Jurjen Oskam Savage's Law of Expediency: You want it bad, you'll get it bad.
BGP Connection For Two OpenBSD Machines
Anyone, I have one OpenBGP machine running OpenBGPd that is currently connected to the Internet running OpenBGPd. Furthermore, it has two NIC interfaces. The external NIC is designated as xl0(3com) whereas the internal NIC is rl0(rtlink). From the internal NIC, I connected it to another OpenBSD machine running OpenBPGd. I run ospfd and bgpd in these two machines. The results for both bgpctl and ospfctl showed that bgp and ospf is working. But from the OpenBSD machine behind the one that has internet connection, I cannot ping the internet. I added entries in /etc/resolv.conf and an entry /etc/sysctl.conf has been commented out. Yet still not working. Any tips for this? I Regards, Demuel
Re: BGP Connection For Two OpenBSD Machines
in /etc/sysctl.conf, the net.inet.ip.forwarding=1 and in /etc/resolv.conf i added a valid public ip address as well. [EMAIL PROTECTED] a icrit : Anyone, I have one OpenBGP machine running OpenBGPd that is currently connected to the Internet running OpenBGPd. Furthermore, it has two NIC interfaces. The external NIC is designated as xl0(3com) whereas the internal NIC is rl0(rtlink). From the internal NIC, I connected it to another OpenBSD machine running OpenBPGd. I run ospfd and bgpd in these two machines. The results for both bgpctl and ospfctl showed that bgp and ospf is working. But from the OpenBSD machine behind the one that has internet connection, I cannot ping the internet. I added entries in /etc/resolv.conf and an entry /etc/sysctl.conf has been commented out. Which one ? net.inet.ip.forwarding ? -- Ronnie Garcia r.garcia at ovea dot com
Re: BGP Connection For Two OpenBSD Machines
These are my configurations: OpenBSD With Internet And OpenBGP Running - external ip xl0(internet): some-public-ip internal ip rl0: 192.168.111.254/30 $ sudo bgpctl -n show summary Neighbor ASMsgRcvdMsgSentOutQ Up/Down State/PrefixRcvd 192.168.111.253 65533 2723 2726 0 08:50:13 0 OpenBSD machine that established BGP session to the gateway --- $ sudo bgpctl -n show summary Neighbor ASMsgRcvdMsgSentOutQ Up/Down State/PrefixRcvd 192.168.111.254 65535 1057 1058 0 08:47:34 1 Checking the RIB $ sudo bgpctl show rib flags: * = Valid, = Selected, I = via IBGP, A = Announced origin: i = IGP, e = EGP, ? = Incomplete flags destination gateway lpref med aspath origin AI* 192.168.111.0/240.0.0.0100 0 i * 192.168.111.0/24192.168.111.254100 0 65535 i Checking the RIB $ sudo bgpctl show fib flags: * = valid, B = BGP, C = Connected, S = Static N = BGP Nexthop reachable via this route r = reject route, b = blackhole route flags destination gateway *CN 192.168.111.252/30 link#1 *S r 224.0.0.0/4 127.0.0.1 *S r ::/96::1 *S r ::/104 ::1 * ::1/128 ::1 *S r ::127.0.0.0/104 ::1 *S r ::224.0.0.0/100 ::1 *S r ::255.0.0.0/104 ::1 *S r :::0.0.0.0/96::1 *S r 2002::/24::1 *S r 2002:7f00::/24 ::1 *S r 2002:e000::/20 ::1 *S r 2002:ff00::/24 ::1 *S r fe80::/10::1 *Cfe80::%rl0/64link#1 Cfe80::%dc0/64link#2 *Cfe80::%xl0/64link#3 * fe80::%lo0/64fe80::1%lo0 *S r fec0::/10::1 * ff01::/32::1 *Cff02::%rl0/32link#1 Cff02::%dc0/32link#2 *Cff02::%xl0/32link#3 * ff02::%lo0/32::1 Everything appears to be valid. But if I put 192.168.111.254 in /etc/mygate, I could get internet. Is this BGP? Side comments? Regards, demuel $sudo bgpctl -n show summary On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 01:37:28PM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Anyone, I have one OpenBGP machine running OpenBGPd that is currently connected to the Internet running OpenBGPd. Furthermore, it has two NIC interfaces. The external NIC is designated as xl0(3com) whereas the internal NIC is rl0(rtlink). From the internal NIC, I connected it to another OpenBSD machine running OpenBPGd. I run ospfd and bgpd in these two machines. The results for both bgpctl and ospfctl showed that bgp and ospf is working. But from the OpenBSD machine behind the one that has internet connection, I cannot ping the internet. I added entries in /etc/resolv.conf and an entry /etc/sysctl.conf has been commented out. Yet still not working. Any tips for this? I Check the RIB and the kernel routing table. Do the routes look ok? Is the fib coupled? Is the nexthop valid? Does the RIB on your secondary bgpd look OK -- valid, correct nexthop? -- :wq Claudio
Re: BGP Connection For Two OpenBSD Machines
Where should I suppose to declare announce default-route? And I commented all
entries in the
# filter out prefixes longer than 24 or shorter than 8 bits
# do not accept a default route
# filter bogus networks
In the internal OpenBSD machine, I did invoke:
$ sudo bgpctl sh next
Nexthop State
192.168.111.254 valid rl0 UP, Ethernet, active, 100 MBit/s
$ ping www.yahoo.com
ping: unknown host: www.yahoo.com
$ ping 192.168.111.254
PING 192.168.111.254 (192.168.111.254): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 192.168.111.254: icmp_seq=0 ttl=255 time=0.435 ms
--- 192.168.111.254 ping statistics ---
1 packets transmitted, 1 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/std-dev = 0.435/0.435/0.435/0.000 ms
$
Any comments?
Regards,
demuel
OpenBSD With Internet And OpenBGP Running
Does this one announce a default route into bgp to the other machine?
('announce default-route')
OpenBSD machine that established BGP session to the gateway
Does this one accept a default route announced by the other machine?
(comment out 'deny from any prefix 0.0.0.0/0')
$ sudo bgpctl show rib
(if you're in wheel, you can skip the sudo.)
Check the RIB and the kernel routing table. Do the routes look ok? Is the
fib coupled? Is the nexthop valid? Does the RIB on your secondary bgpd
look OK -- valid, correct nexthop?
'bgpctl sh nex' to check nexthops.
Re: Broadcom Gigabit NIC Interface Translation From Debian/Linux To OpenBSD
Even with the correction, still I cannot reach location A from location vice versa. For inet 192.168.111.1 255.255.255.0 192.168.111.255 it did not tell us if it is autoselect. I believe it could be looking like inet 192.168.111.1 255.255.255.0 NONE Tips? [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Anybody, I have two OpenBSD machines connected with 2Mbps thru a leased-lines in different locations, A B. Both machines colocated at location A and location B has a bge0 NIC card with 100/1000Mbps speed and each of these interfaces shall be connected to a device between the sites. This NIC card is detected and configured in Debian/Linux as: eth1 speed 10 duplex full autoneg off I just wonder how I should re-configure this NIC card in OpenBSD. I tried Location A -- $sudo vi /etc/hostname.bge0 inet 192.168.111.1 netmask 255.255.255.0 NONE Wrong syntax for hostname.if file (man 5 hostname.if). No netmask keyword. You can read there how to set media options (man bge, man ifconfig). inet 192.168.111.1 255.255.255.0 192.168.111.255 Aleksandar
Broadcom Gigabit NIC Interface Translation From Debian/Linux To OpenBSD
Anybody, I have two OpenBSD machines connected with 2Mbps thru a leased-lines in different locations, A B. Both machines colocated at location A and location B has a bge0 NIC card with 100/1000Mbps speed and each of these interfaces shall be connected to a device between the sites. This NIC card is detected and configured in Debian/Linux as: eth1 speed 10 duplex full autoneg off I just wonder how I should re-configure this NIC card in OpenBSD. I tried Location A -- $sudo vi /etc/hostname.bge0 inet 192.168.111.1 netmask 255.255.255.0 NONE Location B -- $sudo vi /etc/hostname.bge0 inet 192.168.111.2 netmask 255.255.255.0 NONE What stumbled me is that I cannot ping location A from location B vice-versa. Any tips to sort this out is equally appreciated. Regards, Demuel
BGP With Private AS and IP Addresses Routing To An Internet Gateway
Anybody, If I have two internal routers, say RouterB(ext: 172.16.111.253/32 and int: 10.77.222.254/32) and RouterC(ext: 10.77.222.253/32 and int: 10.222.77.254/32), and these two routers had already established a BGP session. Now, let us say I will have Router B in BGP with RouterA(ext: Internet and 172.16.111.254/32). In all of the routers involved, I enable net.ip.forwarding=1 in /etc/sysctl.conf. Also in routerA, I enabled pf with NAT support. From Router A, I could ping the Internet. But from routerB having a BGP session with RouterA, I cannot ping the internet. And so does in RouterC. Any tips to sort this out? Regards, Demuel
Re: BGP With Private AS and IP Addresses Routing To An Internet Gateway
Anyone, Router A - $ sudo bgpctl show rib flags: * = Valid, = Selected, I = via IBGP, A = Announced origin: i = IGP, e = EGP, ? = Incomplete flags destination gateway lpref med aspath origin AI* 10.0.0.1/32 0.0.0.0100 0 i I* 10.0.0.3/32 10.77.222.253 100 0 i AI* 10.77.222.0/24 0.0.0.0100 0 i I* 10.222.111.0/24 10.77.222.253 100 0 i AI* 10.254.254.0/24 0.0.0.0100 0 i AI* 172.16.111.0/24 0.0.0.0100 0 i *192.168.111.0/24172.16.111.254 100 0 65535 i $ Router B - $ sudo bgpctl show rib flags: * = Valid, = Selected, I = via IBGP, A = Announced origin: i = IGP, e = EGP, ? = Incomplete flags destination gateway lpref med aspath origin I* 10.0.0.1/32 10.77.222.254 100 0 i AI* 10.0.0.3/32 0.0.0.0100 0 i I* 10.77.222.0/24 10.77.222.254 100 0 i AI* 10.77.222.0/24 0.0.0.0100 0 i AI* 10.222.111.0/24 0.0.0.0100 0 i I* 10.254.254.0/24 10.77.222.254 100 0 i AI* 10.254.254.0/24 0.0.0.0100 0 i I* 172.16.111.0/24 10.77.222.254 100 0 i I* 192.168.111.0/2410.77.222.254 100 0 65535 i $ In both routers A and B, I used OSPF as my IGP. I even put multihop as well as set nexthop self in the /etc/bgpd.conf, still I cannot ping the internet. The loopback addressess for both Router A and Router A can ping each other though. Tips? Regards, Demuel Have a look at bgpctl show rib. I guess all your routes on B and C are invalid because your using iBGP (same AS on all routers) and in that case the nexthops need to be redistributed via an IGP (or covered by static routes) or you could use set nexthop self to force your routers to announce their own address as nexthop. -- :wq Claudio On Fri, Feb 09, 2007 at 09:45:35AM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Anybody, If I have two internal routers, say RouterB(ext: 172.16.111.253/32 and int: 10.77.222.254/32) and RouterC(ext: 10.77.222.253/32 and int: 10.222.77.254/32), and these two routers had already established a BGP session. Now, let us say I will have Router B in BGP with RouterA(ext: Internet and 172.16.111.254/32). In all of the routers involved, I enable net.ip.forwarding=1 in /etc/sysctl.conf. Also in routerA, I enabled pf with NAT support. From Router A, I could ping the Internet. But from routerB having a BGP session with RouterA, I cannot ping the internet. And so does in RouterC. Any tips to sort this out?
Dummy Interface In OpenBGPd
Hi, As I read the openbgpd documentation, there is not a single point wherein in the examples a dummy interface is being used. Is a dummy interface supported in OpenBGP? Regards, Demuel
Re: Dummy Interface In OpenBGPd
Does that categorically mean there is no way, as of the moment, in openbgp to use a dummy interface just like in Quagga? * [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-02-07 12:31]: As I read the openbgpd documentation, there is not a single point wherein in the examples a dummy interface is being used. Is a dummy interface supported in OpenBGP? -vvv :) from bgpd's perspective, an interface is an interface, mostly. -- Henning Brauer, [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] BS Web Services, http://bsws.de Full-Service ISP - Secure Hosting, Mail and DNS Services Dedicated Servers, Rootservers, Application Hosting - Hamburg Amsterdam
Re: Dummy Interface In OpenBGPd
I have 4 machines running OpenBSD-stable and it used some AS in the 64512-65535 range. Now, two of these machines will be eventually connected to two different AS, say obsd1 to AS 64512 and obsd2 to 64513, while these four machines fall under one AS, say 64513. From my readings in the published article of Claudio Jekker, it appears to me that this setup is for a fully-redundant architecture wherein there could be no single point of failure. I want to experiment with creating dummy interfaces under such topology just like in Quagga. * [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-02-07 13:11]: Does that categorically mean there is no way, as of the moment, in openbgp to use a dummy interface just like in Quagga? well, you have to be more explicity. pseudo-interfaces are just interfaces. there is no visible difference for bgpd. you still didn't say what you actually want. -- Henning Brauer, [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] BS Web Services, http://bsws.de Full-Service ISP - Secure Hosting, Mail and DNS Services Dedicated Servers, Rootservers, Application Hosting - Hamburg Amsterdam
Re: Dummy Interface In OpenBGPd
Can this looback interface be used as a sort of router-id just like in Quagga?
Do I need to add
routes for this IP address reachable elsewhere in my network?
On Wed, Feb 07, 2007 at 12:07:56PM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Does that categorically mean there is no way, as of the moment, in
openbgp to use a dummy interface just like in Quagga?
There are no dummy interfaces. If you like to use a loopback interface
create one.
# cat /etc/hostname.lo1
inet 10.83.66.128 255.255.255.255 NONE
# sh /etc/netstart lo1
That's it. You have a loopback address that can be used in bgpd.
neighbor 10.83.66.164 {
remote-as 65123
local-address 10.83.66.128
}
I guess that's what you are looking for. bgpd does not realy care about
interfaces. Interfaces and their link state are only used to figure out
the availability of nexthops.
Btw. for ospfd you can use interface lo1 to reliably redistribute the
loopback address.
--
:wq Claudio
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-02-07 12:31]:
As I read the openbgpd documentation, there is not a single point wherein
in the examples a
dummy
interface is being used. Is a dummy interface supported in OpenBGP?
-vvv :)
from bgpd's perspective, an interface is an interface, mostly.
--
Henning Brauer, [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
BS Web Services, http://bsws.de
Full-Service ISP - Secure Hosting, Mail and DNS Services
Dedicated Servers, Rootservers, Application Hosting - Hamburg Amsterdam
Re: Dummy Interface In OpenBGPd
What i want to accomplish and wanted to do is to be able to use such an interface when all the NIC on my machines are alloted for BGP. * [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-02-07 14:08]: I want to experiment with creating dummy interfaces under such topology just like in Quagga. this doesn't lead anywhere, really. I don't know what dummy interfaces .. just like in quagga are, and, moreover, it is completely unclear what you want to accomplish. you probably just want a loopback interface, but that is a guess. -- Henning Brauer, [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] BS Web Services, http://bsws.de Full-Service ISP - Secure Hosting, Mail and DNS Services Dedicated Servers, Rootservers, Application Hosting - Hamburg Amsterdam
Re: Dummy Interface In OpenBGPd
The thing is, after I creatd /etc/hostname.lo1 as stated and I tring to ping it
from other devices
within that network, it is not reachable. I put network 10.83.66.128/32 in my
/etc/bgpd.conf but
still I can only ping this interface from that host it is put in but not from
the other host.
Some hints? Should I manually add a route to it in the kernel routing table?
On Wed, Feb 07, 2007 at 12:07:56PM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Does that categorically mean there is no way, as of the moment, in
openbgp to use a dummy interface just like in Quagga?
There are no dummy interfaces. If you like to use a loopback interface
create one.
# cat /etc/hostname.lo1
inet 10.83.66.128 255.255.255.255 NONE
# sh /etc/netstart lo1
That's it. You have a loopback address that can be used in bgpd.
neighbor 10.83.66.164 {
remote-as 65123
local-address 10.83.66.128
}
I guess that's what you are looking for. bgpd does not realy care about
interfaces. Interfaces and their link state are only used to figure out
the availability of nexthops.
Btw. for ospfd you can use interface lo1 to reliably redistribute the
loopback address.
--
:wq Claudio
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-02-07 12:31]:
As I read the openbgpd documentation, there is not a single point wherein
in the examples a
dummy
interface is being used. Is a dummy interface supported in OpenBGP?
-vvv :)
from bgpd's perspective, an interface is an interface, mostly.
--
Henning Brauer, [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
BS Web Services, http://bsws.de
Full-Service ISP - Secure Hosting, Mail and DNS Services
Dedicated Servers, Rootservers, Application Hosting - Hamburg Amsterdam
OpenBGP Won't Establish A Session/Connection?
Hi,
I had setup a private test network with the following information to test
openbgp:
OBSD-01
---
AS: 65213
IP: 10.0.111.77
OBSD-02
---
AS: 65123
IP: 172.16.111.77
My /etc/bgpd.conf configuration for OBSD-01 and for OBSD-02:
# OBSD-01
AS 65213
router-id 10.0.111.77
network 10.0.111.0/24
neighbor 172.16.111.77 {
remote-as 65123
descr link to OBSD-02
}
# filter out prefixes longer than 24 or shorter than 8 bits
deny from any
allow from any prefixlen 8 - 24
# do not accept a default route
deny from any prefix 0.0.0.0/0
# filter bogus networks
deny from any prefix 10.0.0.0/8 prefixlen = 8
deny from any prefix 172.16.0.0/12 prefixlen = 12
deny from any prefix 192.168.0.0/16 prefixlen = 16
deny from any prefix 169.254.0.0/16 prefixlen = 16
deny from any prefix 192.0.2.0/24 prefixlen = 24
deny from any prefix 224.0.0.0/4 prefixlen = 4
# OBSD-02
AS 65123
router-id 172.16.111.77
network 172.16.111.0/24
neighbor 10.0.111.77 {
remote-as 65123
descr link to OBSD-02
}
# filter out prefixes longer than 24 or shorter than 8 bits
deny from any
allow from any prefixlen 8 - 24
# do not accept a default route
deny from any prefix 0.0.0.0/0
# filter bogus networks
deny from any prefix 10.0.0.0/8 prefixlen = 8
deny from any prefix 172.16.0.0/12 prefixlen = 12
deny from any prefix 192.168.0.0/16 prefixlen = 16
deny from any prefix 169.254.0.0/16 prefixlen = 16
deny from any prefix 192.0.2.0/24 prefixlen = 24
deny from any prefix 224.0.0.0/4 prefixlen = 4
Invoking /usr/sbin/bgpctl reload then doing /usr/sbin/bgpctl -n show
resulted in to the
following:
For /usr/sbin/bgpctl:
reload request sent.
request processed
For /usr/sbin/bgpctl show:
Neighbor ASMsgRcvdMsgSentOutQ Up/Down State/PrefixRcvd
172.16.111.7765213 0 0 0 NeverActive
10.0.111.77 65213 0 0 0 NeverActive
My reference was the paper written by Claudio Jeker
(www.openbsd.org/papers/linuxtag06-network.pdf). I just replaced the IP address
with my setup but
as we can see in Up/Down as well as in State/PrefixRcvd in my result, it is in
contrast with the
result reflected in his paper.
Please advise if I did missed something down here.
Regards,
Demuel
Compiling OpenBSD Kernel With Generic SMP
All, I have a machine, Dell 1855, that has one SATA hard disk drive but with two Pentium Xeon 2.0Ghz processor. Now, I have both the stable/current source code both for the kernel and the userland. I suppose that the GENERIC kernel supports only one processor whereas the GENERIC.SMP supports multiple processor. The FAQ deals with the GENERIC processor and I cannot get anything under it that tells what to do if one will compile from the source code with a GENERIC.SMP kernel. Any tips and sidecomments are welcome. Regards, Demuel
Re: Compiling OpenBSD Kernel With Generic SMP
Hi, As you can see, there are only few entries in the GENERIC.MP and if it compiles indeed how about the device drivers usually found in the GENERIC? Would it be included when GENERIC.MP compiles? Regards, Demuel Josh Grosse On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 10:24:17PM +0800, Demuel I. Bendano, R.E.E wrote: ...I have a machine, Dell 1855, that has one SATA hard disk drive but with two Pentium Xeon 2.0Ghz processor. Now, I have both the stable/current source code both for the kernel and the userland. I suppose that the GENERIC kernel supports only one processor whereas the GENERIC.SMP supports multiple processor. The FAQ deals with the GENERIC processor and I cannot get anything under it that tells what to do if one will compile from the source code with a GENERIC.SMP kernel. It's GENERIC.MP -- to create a -stable version of that kernel, make three changes to the step-by-step instructions in FAQ 5: 1) use config GENERIC.MP instead of config GENERIC 2) cd to ../compile/GENERIC.MP instead of ../compile/GENERIC 3) when copying the bsd kernel to your root partition, either copy it to /bsd or /bsd.mp depending on how you manage your -release bsd.mp kernel.
Re: Compiling OpenBSD Kernel With Generic SMP
* at azalia? audio* at fms? audio* at maestro? audio* at esa? audio* at yds? audio* at emu? bktr0 at pci? # FM-Radio devices #gtp* at pci? # Gemtek/Guillemot Radio PCI Radio Card #sfr0 at isa? port 0x384 # SoundForte RadioLink SF16-FMR FM Radio Card #sf2r0 at isa? port 0x384 # SoundForte RadioLink SF16-FMR2 FM Radio Card #az0at isa? port 0x350 # Aztech/PackardBell FM Radio Card #rt0at isa? port 0x30c # AIMS Lab Radiotrack FM Radio Card #rt*at isapnp? #rtii0 at isa? port 0x30c # AIMS Lab Radiotrack II FM Radio Card # FM-Radio support radio* at bktr? radio* at fms? #radio* at gtp? #radio* at sfr? #radio* at sf2r? #radio* at az? #radio* at rt? #radio* at rtii? # Joystick driver. Probe is a little strange; add only if you have one. #joy0 at isa? port 0x201 joy*at isapnp? # crypto support hifn* at pci? # Hi/fn 7751 crypto card lofn* at pci? # Hi/fn 6500 crypto card nofn* at pci? # Hi/fn 7814/7851/7854 crypto card ubsec* at pci? # Bluesteel Networks 5xxx crypto card safe* at pci? # SafeNet SafeXcel 1141/1741 #ises* at pci? # Pijnenburg PCC-ISES glxsb* at pci? # AMD Geode LX series processor security block # I2O iop*at pci? # I2O processor ioprbs* at iop? # I2O arrays scsibus* at ioprbs? iopsp* at iop? # I2O SCSI pass-through scsibus* at iopsp? # GPIO ``pin bus'' drivers #gpioiic* at gpio? offset 0 mask 0x3# I2C bus bit-banging #iic* at gpioiic? #gpioow* at gpio? offset 0 mask 0x1 # 1-Wire bus bit-banging #onewire* at gpioow? # 1-Wire devices option ONEWIREVERBOSE owid* at onewire? # ID owtemp* at onewire? # Temperature pseudo-device pctr1 pseudo-device mtrr1 # Memory range attributes control pseudo-device nvram 1 pseudo-device sequencer 1 #pseudo-device raid4 # RAIDframe disk driver pseudo-device bio 1 # ioctl multiplexing device pseudo-device hotplug 1 # devices hot plugging # mouse keyboard multiplexor pseudo-devices pseudo-device wsmux 2 pseudo-device crypto 1 The FAQ doesn't tell as sort of an example on how to compile a new kernel with SMP support as a contrast to the example which is obviously on compiling a GENERIC kernel. Side comments? Regards, Demuel Jim Razmus * Demuel I. Bendano, R.E.E [EMAIL PROTECTED] [070124 10:35]: All, I have a machine, Dell 1855, that has one SATA hard disk drive but with two Pentium Xeon 2.0Ghz processor. Now, I have both the stable/current source code both for the kernel and the userland. I suppose that the GENERIC kernel supports only one processor whereas the GENERIC.SMP supports multiple processor. The FAQ deals with the GENERIC processor and I cannot get anything under it that tells what to do if one will compile from the source code with a GENERIC.SMP kernel. Any tips and sidecomments are welcome. Regards, Demuel Either kernel can compile either kernel. You just config the one you want to build as per the FAQ. I'm guessing that's the information you wanted. Jim
L2TP/FreeRadius In OpenBSD
All, Has anyone did a successful implementation of L2TP+FreeRadius in OpenBSD? It appears to me that the FAQ and googling produced an almost absence of references related to OpenBSD. Demuel
Re: VOIP NAT
In this kind of discussion, it is pretty safe to assume that the VOIP PABX used is an asterisk running either SIP/IAX2/H323/RTP protocols. Googling will provide us with the corresponding range of ports in each of them either in UDP or in TCP. Now, it is easy to get this working. In the IP phones, one has to enable the NAT feature and for the asterisk server running OpenBSD it is educational to allow first both incoming/outgoing traffic as pass in as well as pass all. The major easy here is on how the voice traffic from OBSD-VPN-A to OBSD-VPN-B and vice versa encrypted. That is, an encryption of the voice traffic as full-duplex. Any comments? Jeroen Massar Bob DeBolt wrote: [ Note your PGP armor was broken in the previous message, please check and fix if possible, it could be of course that the mailinglist peeped it up somewhere. Best solution: don't use inline PGP signing, but use the MIME variant, which is available in enigmail, eg I use it :) ] If anyone reading this understands the VOIP / NAT issue, preferably via experience, and has an answer to what is involved making VOIP work through a pf enabled OpenBSD 4.0 stable firewall, Could you please lend a hand, offer direction? It all depends on what exact components you have and how strict the firewall is. I wonder how related it is for misc@openbsd.org but Questions: - Which exact protocols are being used - What is the client (software/hardware/version) - What is the server (software/hardware/version) - What does the network look like and probably some other info I forget ;) Generic VoIP (read: SIP) over NAT solutions: http://www.voip-info.org/wiki/view/STUN http://www.voip-info.org/wiki/view/MediaProxy http://www.voip-info.org/wiki/view/Asterisk+SIP+NAT+solutions ... rest of that site ;) and of course throwing any VPN tunnel over the NAT to get a public address and using that for everything. Greets, Jeroen [demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type application/pgp-signature which had a name of signature.asc]
Net-SNMP In OpenBSD 4.0-Stable
Hi, I been googling with regards to installing/configuring snmpd under OpenBSD. So far, I have success in installing net-snmp for OpenBSD ports. Then I execute the following commands to see if it is working or not. $sudo /usr/local/bin/snmpconf -i -g basic_setup Would you like me to read them in? Their content will be merged with the output files created by this session. Valid answer examples: all, none,3,1,2,5 Read in which (default = all): all, lub po prostu sam [ENTER] Do you want to properly set the value of the sysServices.0 OID (if you don't know, just say no)? (default = y): does this host offer physical services (eg, like a repeater) [answer 0 or 1]: 0 does this host offer datalink/subnetwork services (eg, like a bridge): 0 does this host offer internet services (eg, supports IP): 1 does this host offer end-to-end services (eg, supports TCP): 1 does this host offer application services (eg, supports SMTP): 1 Do you want to allow SNMPv1/v2c read-only community access (default = y): y Configuring: rocommunity Description: a SNMPv1/SNMPv2c read-only access community name arguments: community [default|hostname|network/bits] [oid] The community name to add read-only access for: emf-obsd The hostname or network address to accept this community name from [RETURN for all]: localhost The OID that this community should be restricted to [RETURN for no-restriction]: [ENTER] Do another rocommunity line? (default = y):n Do you want to configure where and if the agent will send traps? (default = y):n Do you want to configure the agent's ability to monitor various aspects of your system? (default = y):y Do you want to configure the agents ability to monitor processes? (default = y): n Do you want to configure the agents ability to monitor disk space? (default = y):y Configuring: disk Description: Check for disk space usage of a partition. The agent can check the amount of available disk space, and make sure it is above a set limit. disk PATH [MIN=10] PATH: mount path to the disk in question. MIN: Disks with space below this value will have the Mib's errorFlag set. Can be a raw byte value or a percentage followed by the % symbol. Default value = 10. The results are reported in the dskTable section of the UCD-SNMP-MIB tree Enter the mount point for the disk partion to be checked on: /var Enter the minimum amount of space that should be available on /var: 5% Finished Output: disk /var 5% Do another disk line? (default = y): n Do you want to configure the agents ability to monitor load average? (default = y): n Do you want to configure the agents ability to monitor file sizes? (default = y): n The following files were created: snmpd.conf installed in /usr/local/share/snmp $sudo cp /etc/snmp/snmpd.conf /etc/snmp/snmpd.conf.bak $sudo cp /usr/local/share/snmp/snmpd.conf /etc/snmp/snmpd.conf /usr/local/sbin/snmpd -c /etc/snmp/snmpd.conf $ sudo snmpwalk -v 1 -c emf-obsd localhost .1.3.6.1.4.1.2021.11.9.0 Timeout: No Response from localhost $ What went wrong with my configuration? Regards, Demuel
Conexant USB/PCI ADSL Modem Under OpenBSD
All, From the results of my googling, it appers to me that an a cxacru 4-2:1.0(Conexant USB ADSL modem) works only on the linux 2.6.x kernel. I just like to know if there is anyone who has a success experience with either the Conexant PCI ADSL modem or the Conexant USB ADSL modem in an OpenBSD platform? Thanks, Demuel
Re: Which tools the OpenBSD developers are using?
Their development operating system is DOS with no remote hole in the default install, in more than 20 years and counting! The one remote whole in the default install happened only when they created OpenBSD. On Tue, Nov 28, 2006 at 02:48:27PM -0600, Alvaro Mantilla Gimenez wrote: Hi OpenBSD developers, Which are your preferred tools for develop? (For C, C++, Java, etcno matter the language) It is good to know which tools and why... Thanks, Alvaro I'm assuming you mean software tools and not hardware (just got a Dell 2405FPW that I'm lovin'). Here's a typical list in no particular order: 1) visual editor -- ed, vi, emacs 2) revision control system -- RCS, CVS, Subversion 3) portability tools -- autotools (autoconf, automake, libtool) 4) build system -- make, gmake, bmake 5) packaging system -- pkgsrc, Open and FreeBSD ports systems 6) debugger -- ddb, gdb 7) decompiler -- jad (for fixing Java bytecode) 8) bug tracking/feature request system -- gnats, bugzilla 9) team collaboration tools -- email, IRC 10) typesetting tools -- teTeX 11) Web browser -- lynx, w3m, Mozilla Apologies to the list for the lack of snide comments. -Damian ps. Two items regarding the AK47. I've heard that the majority of these are being produced illegally (manufacturer didn't get the required license from the Soviet inventor) and that, besides the gun barrel, most parts can be stamped out of sheet metal instead of having to be machined.
Re: network with pabx
can u draw a ASCII rough sketch of what you are trying to do? guys i want to hear some comments / suggestions from you. we are planning to network a company. using a cat5e, the 2 pairs(4 wires) will be using for LAN and the remaining 2 pairs(4 wires) will be use for pabx.
Re: network with pabx
I wonder why your question end up here in the OpenBSD mailing list. Anyways, for the PC-to-Server, do a cross-over(1236-6321) at both ends. If you want still, from PC-Switch-Server, two straight(1236-1236) wound do. For the PABX to your telephone, please be specific if these are Asterisk and VOIP phones. As a hint, crimp another cross-over and straight thru cables and check. If the light is litting up and you can hear a dial-tone from the phone to the pabx, then that is the cable connection. Hope it helps. here's the diagram. -- http://203.177.22.150/lan_voice.jpg can u draw a ASCII rough sketch of what you are trying to do? guys i want to hear some comments / suggestions from you. we are planning to network a company. using a cat5e, the 2 pairs(4 wires) will be using for LAN and the remaining 2 pairs(4 wires) will be use for pabx.
Quagga and OpenBGP
All, I cannot still see the logic as to why Quagga is part of the OpenBSD ports tree when it has OpenBGP at all in the default install? The documentation of OpenBGP tells us that it is far superior in design as compared to Zebra/Quagga. Side comments? dems
Re: Which tools the OpenBSD developers are using?
From what I read of, they might be using some sort of machine language. Hi OpenBSD developers, Which are your preferred tools for develop? (For C, C++, Java, etcno matter the language) It is good to know which tools and why... Thanks, Alvaro
