Re: qwx0 / QCNFA765 Does 802.11g Only
> On Fri, Mar 01, 2024 at 07:14:17PM -0500, Philippe Meunier wrote: > This driver does not yet > support 11n/11ac modes, and adding such support will require a big > chunk of further development time, it won't be ready for 7.5. dear, why didn't you write about it in man? that there is no 11ac. that there is no Host AP. we would have kept your secret and would not have spent our money again in another vain hope to get a native AP with 11ac support in obsd. dear, please don't give us false hopes, because this is very cruel!
espeak does not play
azalia0 at pci0 dev 14 function 0 "Intel Gemini Lake HD Audio" rev 0x06: msi azalia0: no supported codecs -- or(with some changes) -- azalia0 at pci0 dev 14 function 0 "Intel Gemini Lake HD Audio" rev 0x06: msi azalia0: codecs: Intel/0x280d audio0 at azalia0 -- but still doesn't work T_T -- uaudio0 at uhub0 port 1 configuration 1 interface 1 "GeneralPlus USB Audio Device" rev 1.10/1.00 addr 2 uaudio0: class v1, full-speed, sync, channels: 2 play, 1 rec, 8 ctls audio0 at uaudio0 uhidev0 at uhub0 port 1 configuration 1 interface 3 "GeneralPlus USB Audio Device" rev 1.10/1.00 addr 2 uhidev0: iclass 3/0 # sndioctl -dv 010:input[0].level=0..255 (228) 011:input[0].mute=0..1 (0) 006:output[0].level=0..255 (196) 007:output[1].level=0..255 (196) 008:output[0].mute=0..1 (0) 009:output[1].mute=0..1 (0) 001:server.device=0 002:server.device=1 003:server.device=2 004:server.device=3 005:flite0.level=0..127 (127) flite -t "test" -plays espeak "test" -does not play espeak -d snd/0 "test" -does not play espeak -d snd/1 "test" -does not play espeak -d rsnd/1 "test" -does not play espeak -d rsnd/0 "test" -does not play what am i doing wrong?
ugen_clear_iface_eps: clear endpoints failed!
has anyone solved this problem for themselves? three years have passed. terrible_ping_kludge in hid_openbsd.c gives only a few minutes of work, but does not solve the problem with ugen :\ it works fine in linux. maybe we can steal from them? ;)
Re: mountd
> On Tue, Jan 09, 2024 at 10:13:56AM +0300, 4 wrote:
> No need to be so dramatic, the ports only change when the service is
> restarted, so there is no need for constant monitoring and/or script
> running. Either you run the script (a one-liner, by the way, see below)
> on the server upon starting the daemon, or run it on the firewall via
> cron at appropriate intervals (I'm assuming you don't reboot your server
> every 10 minutes, so it can be run at large intervals).
> You may not find it "very pretty", but hey, it works fine. NFS over
> firewalls decidedly isn't great, but it's the smallest of my NFS woes.
> OT, they got to the moon with the computing power of a pocket
> calculator, and the physics of going to mars are pretty much the same,
> so I find your argument moot. Also, its literally a one line script.
> Not exactly rocket science.
> rpcinfo -p a.b.c.d | awk 'NR>1 { print "pass inet proto " $3 " to port "
> $4 " flags any" }' | pfctl -a "portmap/$a" -f -
forget about the moon. with such a high-quality script you won't even be able
get to the nearest mcdonalds >_< even eighteen years ago this did much better.
i'm setting up a chinese ip-camera, and i need to restart nfs frequently for
testing(yes, i later opened everything for the tests, but at first i didn’t
understand the reason. and this camera is another example of something that
will never reach the moon >:( hikvision- maybe you've heard? ;)). although with
the camera is already ended, but i just still don't understand why openbsd is
"fighting in the wrong direction", because everyone else can do "-p" %\ “this
is for your safety, please don’t leave the house”- oh, i’ve heard that
somewhere before :D
Re: mountd
> On Tue, Jan 09, 2024 at 10:13:56AM +0300, 4 wrote: > These kind of off-topic remarks won't help you getting answers, > -Otto "i'm only human after all don't put your blame on me"
Re: mountd
>> i'm quoting the man page for mountd: >> The -n flag historically allowed clients to use non-reserved ports when >> communicating with mountd. In OpenBSD, a reserved port is always used. >> "reserved port". "always".. however the port is different each time. how to >> deal with this? >> > resreved means that the port number is below 1024. The RPC system, > (which is used to implement NFS) iuses portmapper to determine which > service runs on which port. What problem are you trying to solve? > -Otto i'm trying to solve the problem of which port need to open on the pf. the variant of processing rpcinfo output with script and then putting a rules into an anchor is not very pretty. especially considering that this is not enough, and i still need to repeat this action by cron. this variant works, but it's not even close to how it should work %\ why i should solve such the task at a time when humanity is flying to conquer Mars?
mountd
i'm quoting the man page for mountd: The -n flag historically allowed clients to use non-reserved ports when communicating with mountd. In OpenBSD, a reserved port is always used. "reserved port". "always".. however the port is different each time. how to deal with this?
bioctl: one key for multiple disks
how to use one key for multiple disks? i naively believed that since bioctl does not have any keys for this, then a key on the specified key's partition will be used, and if it is not there, a new one will be created, and deleting the key it is the responsibility of the user, but in practice there is nothing like this, the key is simply overwritten with a new one. i understand that logic and reason are not about obsd, but maybe there is some kind of hack to solve this problem? "- just create a new key's partition for each disk" "- oh, yeah! a brilliant solution. and very scalable!" but i'm not sure that even this can be done. i'm tired of restoring the router's state after unsuccessful experiments, i would like to use someone else's experience. i don’t know how the crypto partition works, i don’t know how to see what’s on it, but maybe it’s possible to place several keys on one partition if i can’t use one key for several disks? i don’t know.. there are dozens of theoretical ways for how to solve the problem of storing keys
Re: pf queues
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 03:55:49PM +0300, 4 wrote: >> >> "cbq can entirely be expressed in it" ok. so how do i set priorities for >> queues in hfsc for my local(not for a router above that knows nothing about >> my existence. tos is an absolutely unviable concept in the real world) >> pf-router? i don't see a word about it in man pf.conf >> > In my reply to the initial message in this thread, I gave you the references > that spell this out fairly clearly. > And you're dead wrong about the pf.conf man page. Unless of course you > are trying to look this up on a system that still runs something that > is by now roughly a decade out of date. i don't understand what you're pointing at, because "prio" and "hfsc" are different independent mechanisms, not two parts of one whole. in cbq these were two parts of the same mechanism, cbq could simultaneously slice and priotize traffic
Re: pf queues
> On 2023-12-01, 4 wrote: >I don't know why you are going on about SMT here. i'm talking about not sacrificing functionality for the sake of hypothetical performance. the slides say that using queues degrades performance by 10%. and you're saying there won't be anything in the queues until an overload event occurs. as i understand it, these are interrelated things ;) >And there is no way to tell when the upstream router has forwarded the packets. and we don't need to know that. the only way to find out when an overload "occurred" is to set some threshold value lower than the theoretical bandwidth of the interface and look when the actual speed on the interface exceeds this threshold. and then we will put packets in queues, but not early(so that our slaves don't get too tired, right?). but this has nothing with when overload actually happens but not in our imagination. in the most cases there is no bond between what we have assumed and what is actually happening(because there is no feedback. yes, there is ecn, but it doesn't work). i don't like this algorithm because it's a non-working algorithm. but an algorithm with priorities, when we ALWAYS(and not only when an imaginary overload occurred) put a packets in the queues, when we ALWAYS send packets with a higher priority first, and all the others only when there are no packets with a higher priority in the queue, this algorithm is working. i.e. we always use queues, despite the loss of 10% performance. what will happen on the overloaded upstream router is no our problem. our area of responsibility is to put more important for us packets into the our network card. but this requires a constantly working(and not only when an imaginary overload has occurred) priority mechanism. that's why i say that "prio" is much more useful than "hsfc". but it is also possible that traffic as important to us as ssh can take our entire channel, and we don't want that. and that's exactly where we need to limit the maximum queue speed. there may also be a situation where at least some number of packets should be guaranteed to go through some queue, for icmp as example, and here we need hsfc, since priorities alone cannot solve this problem. or we need cbq that could do it all at once. and i exist for all this to work well, it is i who must plan all this competently and prudently- this is my area of responsibility. and look, i need priorities and speed limits for this, but i don’t need to know how the upstream router is doing. if he has problems, he will send me confirmation of receipt less often or he will simply discard my packets. but that's his business, not mine. and in the same way my router will deal with clients on my local network. >BTW, HFSC with bandwidth and max set to the same values should be the same >thing as CBQ. except that the hfsc does not have a priority mechanism. ps: >But CBQ doesn't help anyway, you still have this same problem. the problem when both from below and from above can be told to you "go and fuck yourself" can't be solved, but cbq gives us two mechanisms we need- priorities and traffic restriction. nothing more can be done. but and less will not suit us
Re: pf queues
> On 2023-11-30, 4 wrote: >> we can simply calculate such a basic thing as the flow rate by dividing the >> number of bytes in the past packets by the time. we can control the speed >> through delays in sending packets. this is one side of the question. as for >> the sequence, priorities work here. yes, we will send packets with a higher >> priority until there are no such packets left in a queue, and then we will >> send packets from queues with a lower priority. priorities are a sequence, >> not a share of the total piece of the pie, and we don't need to know >> anything about the pie. > But unless you are sending more traffic than the *interface* speed, > you will be sending it out on receipt, there won't be any delays in > sending packets to the next-hop modem/router. > There won't *be* any packets in the queue on the PF machine to send in > priority order. ok. that is, for the sake of some 10% performance(not so long ago Theo turned off smt, and wanted to remove its support altogether. but smt it's significantly more than 10% of performance) you use queues only when the channel overload, that you are not able to reliably detect, but only assume about its occurrence? there's nothing easier! just put packets in the queue at all times :D
Re: pf queues
> On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 00:12:02 +0300 > 4 wrote: >> i haven't used queues for a long time, but now there is a need. >> previously, queues had not only a hierarchy, but also a priority. now >> there is no priority, only the hierarchy exists. > It took me quite some time to wrap my head around this, having been > accustomed to HFSC up until 5.5. One can probably find a lot of my > emails in misc@ archives from that time. > Nowadays I am matching traffic to prio and queue by protocol and/or > destination port only. Anything not explicitly matched goes to lowest prio > queue and logged even when passed, so I can inspect if there are any > types of traffic which should be put into appropriate prio / queue. All > the ACKs except those in lowest prio queue get highest (7) priority, > stuff in lowest prio have lowest prio for ACKs as well. > # QUEUE MATCHES > match proto icmp set prio ( 6 7 ) queue ( 6-fly7-ack ) > tag queued match proto icmp set prio(6 7) queue(6-fly 7-ack) how is this supposed to work at all? i.e. packets are placed both in prio's queues 6/7(in theory priorities and queues are the same thing), and in hsfc's queues 6-fly/7-ack at once? i am surprised that this rule does not cause a syntax error. it looks interesting(i didn't know it was possible. is this definitely not a bug? :D), but still i don't understand the intent %\ i need to think about it and experiment. thank you, it was very valuable information!
Re: pf queues
> On 11/29/23 6:47 PM, Stuart Henderson wrote: >> On 2023-11-29, Daniel Ouellet wrote: yes, all this can be make without hierarchy, only with priorities(because hierarchy it's priorities), but who and why decided that eight would be enough? the one who created cbq- he created it for practical tasks. but this "hateful eight" and this "flat-earth"- i don't understand what use they are, they can't even solve such the simplified task :\ so what am i missing? >>> >>> man pf.conf >>> >>> Look for set tos. Just a few lines below set prio in the man age, >>> >>> You can have more then 8 if you need/have to. >> > Only useful if devices upstream of the PF router know their available >> bandwidth and can do some QoS themselves. >> > Same can be said for CoS as well. You can only control what's going out of > your own network. After that as soon as it reach your ISP or what not, you > have no clue if they reset everything or not. > At a minimum ToS can cross routers, CoS not so much unless it is build for it. > Either way, your QoS will kick in when bandwidth is starving, so if you don't > know that, what's the point... i do not understand how qos and all its components relate to my question, since first we need a working mechanism that would be able to restrict and prioritize traffic(i.e. cbq is needed), and only then we can put something into this mechanism based on qos values. i.e. that is qos here, in principle, cannot be a solution of the problem. we have the separate independent mechanism "prio", which can prioritize traffic with the limited opportunity(only eight queues), but does not know how to restrict him, and we have the separate independent mechanism "hsfc", which can restrict traffic, but does not know how to prioritize it(although it is claimed that it can, but i do not see how to do it). what happens on a provider's hardware is beyond parentheses and generally matters no more than the weather on Mars. so how the hell we can make cbq from hsfc? let's answer this question, because the slides claim that the answer exists
Re: pf queues
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 02:57:23PM +0300, 4 wrote: >> so what happened to cbq? why such the powerful and useful thing was removed? >> or Theo delete it precisely because it was too good for obsd? %D > Actually, the new queueing system was done by Henning, planned as far back > as (at least) 2012 (https://quigon.bsws.de/papers/2012/bsdcan/), finally > available to the general public in OpenBSD 5.5 two years later. > ALTQ support was removed from OpenBSD in time for the OpenBSD 5.6 release > (November 2014). > So, it's been a while and whatever you were running most certainly needed > an upgrade anyway. "cbq can entirely be expressed in it" ok. so how do i set priorities for queues in hfsc for my local(not for a router above that knows nothing about my existence. tos is an absolutely unviable concept in the real world) pf-router? i don't see a word about it in man pf.conf
Re: pf queues
> On 2023-11-29, 4 wrote: >> here is a simple task, there are millions of such tasks. there is an >> internet connection, and although it is declared as symmetrical 100mbit >> it's 100 for download, but for upload it depends on the time of day, so >> we can forget about the channel width and focus on the only thing that >> matters- priorities. > But wait. If you don't know how much bandwidth is available, everything > else goes out the window. > If you don't know how much bw is available in total, you can't decide > how much to allocate to each connection, so even the basic bandwidth > control can't really work, let alone prioritising access to the > available capacity. > Priorities work when you are trying to transmit more out of an interface > than the bandwidth available on that interface. > Say you have a box running PF with a 1Gb interface to a > (router/modem/whatever) with an uplink of somewhere between 100-200Mb. > If you use only priorities in PF, in that case they can only take effect when you have >>1Gb of traffic to send out. > If you queue with a max bw 200Mb, but only 100Mb is available on the > line at times, during those times all that happens is you defer any > queueing decisions to the (router/modem). > The only way to get bandwidth control out of PF in that case is to > either limit to _less than the guaranteed minimum_ (say 100Mb in that > example), losing capacity at other times. Or if you have some way to > fetch the real line speed at various times and adjust the queue speed > in the ruleset. >> --| >> --normal >> ---| >> ---low >> but hierarchy is not enough, we need priorities, since each of these three >> queues can contain other queues. for example, the "high" queue may contain, >> in addition to the "normal" queue, "icmp" and "ssh" queues, which are more >> important than the "normal" queue, in which, for example, we will have http, >> ftp and other non-critical traffic. therefore, we assign priority 0 to the >> "normal" queue, priority 1 to the "ssh" queue and limit its maximum >> bandwidth to 10mb(so that ssh does not eat up the entire channel when >> copying files), and assign priority 2 to the "icmp" queue(icmp is more >> important than ssh). i.e. icmp packets will leave first, then ssh packets, >> and then packets from the "normal" queue and its subqueues(or they won't >> leave if we don't restrict ssh and it eats up the entire channel) > if PF doesn't know the real bandwidth, it _can't_ defer sending lower- > priority traffic until after higher-prio has been sent, because it doesn't > know if won't make it over the line... you're saying that it's impossible to manage traffic if we don't know the real bandwidth of the channel(in 99% of cases we don't know it, because it changes over time. tariffs with guaranteed speed are rare even in russia, and here things are much better with the availability and quality of the inet than the world average(speedtest have the statistics)), but in the end you say the way to do it. are you kidding me? :D we can simply calculate such a basic thing as the flow rate by dividing the number of bytes in the past packets by the time. we can control the speed through delays in sending packets. this is one side of the question. as for the sequence, priorities work here. yes, we will send packets with a higher priority until there are no such packets left in a queue, and then we will send packets from queues with a lower priority. priorities are a sequence, not a share of the total piece of the pie, and we don't need to know anything about the pie. as for the minimum guaranteed bandwidth, if it is set, then just send packets as they appear, assuming that they have the highest priority. send until the speed of such packets not exceeds the guaranteed, all packets above that should be sent based on the given priorities. this is not socialism, where everyone will be fed, this is capitalism, where you will starve and die if you do not belong to the priority elite %D (yes, yes, i know that socialism and capitalism are not about that, but in practice these are their distinctive features). but this is how it should be in the matter of packets traffic. so, where am i wrong and why do we need to know the current bandwidth of the channel?
Re: pf queues
so what happened to cbq? why such the powerful and useful thing was removed? or Theo delete it precisely because it was too good for obsd? %D
Re: pf queues
> On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 12:12:02AM +0300, 4 wrote: >> i haven't used queues for a long time, but now there is a need. previously, >> queues had not only a hierarchy, but also a priority. now there is no >> priority, only the hierarchy exists. i was surprised, but i thought that >> this is quite in the way of Theo, and it is possible to simplify the queue >> mechanism only to the hierarchy, meaning that if a queue standing higher in >> the hierarchy, and he priority is higher. but in order for it to work this >> way, it is necessary to allow assigning packets to any queue, and not just >> to the last one, because when you assign only to the last queue in the >> hierarchy, then in practice it means that you have no hierarchy and no >> queues. and although the rule with the assignment to a queue above the last >> one is not syntactically incorrect, but in practice the assignment is not >> performed, and the packets fall into the default(last) queue. am i missing >> something or is it really idiocy that humanity has not seen yet? >> > How long ago is it that you did anything with queues? > the older ALTQ system was replaced by a whole new system back in OpenBSD 5.5 > (or actually, altq lived on as oldqeueue through 5.6), and the syntax is both > very different and in most things much simpler to deal with. > The most extensive treatment available is in The Book of PF, 3rd edition > (actually the introduction of the new queues was the reason for doing that > revision). If for some reason the book is out of reach, you can likely > glean most of the useful information from the relevant slides in the > PF tutorial https://home.nuug.no/~peter/pftutorial/ with the traffic > shaping part starting at https://home.nuug.no/~peter/pftutorial/#68 looks like i'm phenomenally dumb :( queue rootq on $ext_if bandwidth 20M queue main parent rootq bandwidth 20479K min 1M max 20479K qlimit 100 queue qdef parent main bandwidth 9600K min 6000K max 18M default queue qweb parent main bandwidth 9600K min 6000K max 18M queue qpri parent main bandwidth 700K min 100K max 1200K queue qdns parent main bandwidth 200K min 12K burst 600K for 3000ms queue spamd parent rootq bandwidth 1K min 0K max 1K qlimit 300 -- this is a flat model. no hierarchy here, because no priorities. it looks as hierarchy exists, but this is "fake news" :\ i can't immediately come up with at least one task where such a thing would be needed.. probably no such task exist. pass proto tcp to port ssh set prio 6 -- hard coded eight queues/priorities and no bandwidth controls. but this case is at least is useful, because priorities is much more important than bandwidth limits. i have a feeling that the person who came up with this is Mad Hatter from the Wonderland :\ what was wrong with the cbq engine where all was in one? here is a simple task, there are millions of such tasks. there is an internet connection, and although it is declared as symmetrical 100mbit it's 100 for download, but for upload it depends on the time of day, so we can forget about the channel width and focus on the only thing that matters- priorities. we make three queues, hierarchically connect them to one another: root -| -high --| --normal ---| ---low but hierarchy is not enough, we need priorities, since each of these three queues can contain other queues. for example, the "high" queue may contain, in addition to the "normal" queue, "icmp" and "ssh" queues, which are more important than the "normal" queue, in which, for example, we will have http, ftp and other non-critical traffic. therefore, we assign priority 0 to the "normal" queue, priority 1 to the "ssh" queue and limit its maximum bandwidth to 10mb(so that ssh does not eat up the entire channel when copying files), and assign priority 2 to the "icmp" queue(icmp is more important than ssh). i.e. icmp packets will leave first, then ssh packets, and then packets from the "normal" queue and its subqueues(or they won't leave if we don't restrict ssh and it eats up the entire channel). now: root -| -high[normal(0),ssh(1),icmp(2)] --| --normal[low(0),default(1),http(2),ftp(2)] ---| ---low[bittorrent(0),putin(0),vodka(0)] yes, all this can be make without hierarchy, only with priorities(because hierarchy it's priorities), but who and why decided that eight would be enough? the one who created cbq- he created it for practical tasks. but this "hateful eight" and this "flat-earth"- i don't understand what use they are, they can't even solve such the simplified task :\ so what am i missing?
pf queues
i haven't used queues for a long time, but now there is a need. previously, queues had not only a hierarchy, but also a priority. now there is no priority, only the hierarchy exists. i was surprised, but i thought that this is quite in the way of Theo, and it is possible to simplify the queue mechanism only to the hierarchy, meaning that if a queue standing higher in the hierarchy, and he priority is higher. but in order for it to work this way, it is necessary to allow assigning packets to any queue, and not just to the last one, because when you assign only to the last queue in the hierarchy, then in practice it means that you have no hierarchy and no queues. and although the rule with the assignment to a queue above the last one is not syntactically incorrect, but in practice the assignment is not performed, and the packets fall into the default(last) queue. am i missing something or is it really idiocy that humanity has not seen yet?
Re: Suggestions for miniPCI wireless card for an accesspoint on OpenBSD - 2022q4
> What does mean `broadcom ac chipset`? > Do you have example product at hand? > Which OpenBSD driver is that? > Are you saying this in context of hostap mode? i've tried everything from 11n and above that host ap supports. this is the best variant of the worst, but it definitely works(relatively works. each start of the system is a lottery in which the system can hang on initialization of the card): 6:0:0: Broadcom BCM4371 0x: Vendor ID: 14e4, Product ID: 440d 0x0004: Command: 0006, Status: 0010 0x0008: Class: 02 Network, Subclass: 80 Miscellaneous, Interface: 00, Revision: 02 0x000c: BIST: 00, Header Type: 00, Latency Timer: 00, Cache Line Size: 10 0x0010: BAR mem 64bit addr: 0xa140/0x8000 0x0018: BAR mem 64bit addr: 0xa100/0x0040 0x0020: BAR empty () 0x0024: BAR empty () 0x0028: Cardbus CIS: 0x002c: Subsystem Vendor ID: 103c Product ID: 81b5 0x0030: Expansion ROM Base Address: 0x0038: 0x003c: Interrupt Pin: 01 Line: 0b Min Gnt: 00 Max Lat: 00 0x0048: Capability 0x01: Power Management State: D0 0x0058: Capability 0x05: Message Signalled Interrupts (MSI) Enabled: yes 0x0068: Capability 0x09: Vendor Specific 0x00ac: Capability 0x10: PCI Express Max Payload Size: 256 / 256 bytes Max Read Request Size: 512 bytes Link Speed: 2.5 / 2.5 GT/s Link Width: x1 / x1 0x0100: Enhanced Capability 0x01: Advanced Error Reporting 0x013c: Enhanced Capability 0x03: Device Serial Number Serial Number: a8c2441c 0x0150: Enhanced Capability 0x04: Power Budgeting 0x0160: Enhanced Capability 0x02: Virtual Channel Capability 0x01b0: Enhanced Capability 0x18: Latency Tolerance Reporting 0x0220: Enhanced Capability 0x15: Resizable BAR 0x0240: Enhanced Capability 0x1e: L1 PM but you'd better come to your senses and not go this way. if you don't have enough ports to connect an external access point, then aliexpress has a lan card for mini-pcie. yes, it will be five times more expensive(buying a used AP will cut your costs in half) than just the broadcom wifi card, but your nerves are more expensive
Re: Suggestions for miniPCI wireless card for an accesspoint on OpenBSD - 2022q4
Здравствуйте, Stuart. Вы писали 25 ноября 2022 г., 11:54:13: > On 2022-11-24, Mikolaj Kucharski wrote: >> Hi, >> > If you want something standalone (non OpenBSD) take a look at tp-link's > omada range. Their java+mongo management software (unifi clone) won't > run on OpenBSD but the APs have a web interface. you offer an access point as a solution at a price almost three times more expensive than a toaster with router functions- if you take tp-link products for comparison. it is even more expensive than toasters from the top segment, for example keenetic, which produces almost full-fledged routers. don't you think that your offer is inadequate to the request, which, i remind you, contained a mention of mini-pcie, which means that we are talking about either an old laptop, an old PC or a chinese NUC. the same broadcom wifi card costs ten times less
Re: Suggestions for miniPCI wireless card for an accesspoint on OpenBSD - 2022q4
> I'm using for few years now on OpenBSD accesspoint (mediaopt hostap) > based on following miniPCI card: > # dmesg | grep -e ^ath > athn0 at pci4 dev 0 function 0 "Atheros AR928X" rev 0x01: apic 5 int 16 > athn0: AR9280 rev 2 (2T2R), ROM rev 22, address 04:f0:21:45:6a:c4 > I don't remember where I bought it, but I think it is one of those, or > compatibile: > https://www.pcengines.ch/wle200nx.htm > If you would build today an accesspoint, on hardware with miniPCI, what > would you choose, for OpenBSD? i would choose(and i chose) an external access point. i've been trying for a long time to do something sane in terms of an access point, but i realized that the next thing Theo will cut out from obsd would be the 802.11 subsystem. and don't believe what the same bwfm promises, although 11ac mode is declared there, but in fact it works like 11n. an external access point is the only variant. except, of course, the variant to leave obsd. the very concept professed by obsd will not allow to be anywhere except in the tail of progress. obsd is not about how to live, it's about how to survive. if you still choose bwfm, then know that somewhere once every ten downloads the system will freeze
Re: Problem : no traffic on on a second network interface card
ip address is of 192.168. hostname is comaqs domain name is domo.netB B dmesg is as follows, with this configuaration the nic which doesn't work is the vr0 B OpenBSD 4.8 (GENERIC) #136: Mon Auf 16 09:06:23 MDT 2010 B B B B B B B dera...@i386.opendsb.org:/usr/src/arch/i386/compile/GENERICB cpu0: AMD Duron(tm) processor (b AuthenticAMDb 686-class, 64KB L2 cache 1.60 GHz cpu0: FPU,V86,DE,PSE,TSC,MSR,PAE,MCE,CX8,SEP,MTRR,PGE,MCA,CMOV,PAT,PSE36,MMX,FXSR,S SE real mem = 536379392 (511MB) avail mem = 517648384 (493MB) mainbus0 at root bios0 at mainbus0: AT/286+ BIOS, date 09/10/03, BIOS rev. 0 @ 0xfb3b0, SMBIOS rev. 2.2 @0xf0800 (34 entries) bios0: vendor Phoenx Technologies, LTD version b 6.00 PCb date 09/10/2003 bios0: VIA Technologies, Inc. VT8367-8235 apm0 at bios0: PowerManagement spec V1.2 (slowidle) lapm0: AC on, battery charge unknown acpi at bios0 function 0x0 not configured pcibios0: at bios0: rev. 2.1 @0xf/0xdf74 pcibios0: PCI IRQ Routing Table rev. 1.0 @ 0xfdec0/176 (9 entries) pcibios0: PCI Exclusive IRQs: 5 10 11 12 pcibios0:Interrupt Router at 000:17:0 (b VIA VT82C596A ISAb rev 0x00) pcibios0: PCI bus #1 is the last bus bios0: ROM list: 0x/0xb000 cpu at mainbus0: (uniprocessor) pci0 at mainbus0 bus 0: configuration mode 1 (bios) pchb0 at pci0 dev 0 function 0 b VIA VT8366 PCIb rev 0x00 viaagp0 at pchb: v2 agp0 at viaagp0: aperture at 0xd000, size 0x1000 ppb0 at pci0 dev 1 function 0 b VIA VT8366 AGPb rev 0x00 pci1 at ppb0 bus 1 vga1 at pci1 dev 0 function 0 b ATI Radeon VEb rev 0x00 wsdisplay0 at vga1 mux 1:console (80x25, vt100 emulation) wsdisplay0: screen 1-5 added (80x25, vt100 emulation) radeondrm0 at vga1: irq 11 drm0 at radeondrm0 re0 at pci0 dev 9 function 0 b Realtek 8169b rev 0x10: RTL8169/8110SB (0x1000), irq 10, address 74:ea:3a:81:f0:95 rgephy at re0 phy 7: RTL8169S/811oS PHY rev. 3 uhci0 at pci0 dev 16 function 0 b VIA VT83C572 USBb rev 0x80: irq 11 uhci1 at pci0 dev 16 function 1 b VIA VT83C572 USBb rev 0x80: irq 10 uhci2 at pci0 dev 16 function 2 b VIA VT83C572 USBb rev 0x80: irq 12 ehci0 at pci0 dev 16 function 3 b VIA VT6202 USBb rev 0x82: irq 5 usb0 at ehci0: USB revision 2.0 uhub0 at usb0 b VIA EHCI root hubb rev 2.00/1 addr 1 viapm0 at pci0 dev 17 function 0 b VIA VT8235 ISAb rev 0x00 iic0 at viapm0 spdmem0 at iic0 addr 0x52: 512MB DDR SDRAM non parity PC2700CL2.5 pciide0 at pci0 dev17 function 1 b VIA VT82C571 IDEb rev 0x06: ATA133, channel 0 configured to compatibility, channel 1 configured to compatibility wd0 at pciide0 channel 0 drive 0: QUANTUM FIREBALLlct15 20 wd0: 16-sector PIO, LBA, 19470MB, 39876480 sectors wd1 at pciide0 channel 0 drive 1: QUANTUM FIREBALLlct15 20 wd0: 16-sector PIO, LBA, 19470MB, 39876480 sectors wd0(pciide0:0:0): using PIO mode 4, Ultra-DMA mode 4 wd1(pciide0:0:1): using PIO mode 4, Ultra-DMA mode 4 scsibus0 at atapiscsi0: 2 targets cd0 at scsibus0 targ 0 lun 0:TSSTcorp, CD/DVDW TS-H552B, TS03 ATAPI 5/cdrom removable atapiscsi1 at pciide0 channel 1 drive 1 scsibus1 at atapiscsi1: 2 targets cd0 at scsibus0 targ 0 lun 0:RICOH, CD-R/RW MP7080A, 1.10 ATAPI 5/cdrom removable cd0(pciide0:1:0): using PIO mode 4, Ultra-DMA mode 4 cd1(pciide0:1:1): using PIO mode 4, Ultra-DMA mode 4 vr0 at pci0 dev 18 function 0 b VIA Rhinell-2b rev 0x74: irq 11, address 00:0d:87:98:c3:61 ukphy0 at vr0 phy 1: GENERIC IEEE802.3u media interface, rev. 9: t usb1 b OUI 0x004063, model 0x0032 usb1 at uhci0: USB revision 1.0 uhub1 at usb1 b VIA UHCI root hubb rev 1.00/1.00 addr 1 usb2 at uhci1: USB revision 1.0 uhub2 at usb2 b VIA UHCI root hubb rev 1.00/1.00 addr 1 usb1 at uhci2: USB revision 1.0 uhub3 at usb3 b VIA UHCI root hubb rev 1.00/1.00 addr 1 isa0 at mainbus0 isadma0 at isa0 com0 at isa0 port 0x3f8/8 irq 4; ns16550a, 16 byte fifo pckbc0 at isa0 port 0x60/5 pckbd0 at pckbc0 (kbd slot) pckbc0: using irq 1 for kbd slot wskbd0 at pckbd0: console keyboard, using wsdisplay0 pcppi0 at isa0 port 0x61 spkr0 at pcppi0 lpt0 at isa0 port 0x378/4 irq 7 it0 at isa0 port 0x2e/2: IT8705F rev 2, EC port 0x290 npx0 at isa0 port 0xf0/16: reported by CPUID; using exception 16 fdc0 at isa0 port 0x3f8/6 irq 6 drq 2 fd0 at fdc0 drive 0: 1.44MB 80 cyl, 2 head, 18 sec biomask ff6d netmask ff6d ttymask mtrr: Pentium Pro MTRR support softraid0 at root root on wd0a swap on wd0b dump on wd0b B B rancor theran...@gmail.com hat am 28. Juli 2011 um 14:27 geschrieben: Well, it would be nice to have some more info like dmesg, hostname.? and other info to help you solve the problem. // rancor Den 28 jul 2011 12:51 skrev wp10596728-4 khaeberl...@cmq-kh.de [mailto:khaeberl...@cmq-kh.de] : Hi all, B I have a machine with 4.8 OpenBSD, which I want to use as a gateway. But I can not get any traffic on the 2nd nic. Forwarding for inet and inet6 is set =1 It is not a problem of the nics. If I install nic2 first then it works and nic1 doesn't work. It is also not a problem of PF, which disabled for testing. B Can anybody tell me what
Problem : no traffic on on a second network interface card
Hi all, B I have a machine with 4.8 OpenBSD, which I want to use as a gateway. But I can not get any traffic on the 2nd nic. Forwarding for inet and inet6 is set =1 It is not a problem of the nics. If I install nic2 first then it works and nic1 doesn't work. It is also not a problem of PF, which disabled for testing. B Can anybody tell me what else do I need to mlook at? B B Klaus
Problem running a second nic
I have a machine with OpenBSD 4.8 which Iwant to use as a gateway. I am unable to get any traffic from, to ,through the second nic. ifconfig shows that the interface is active inet and inet6 forwarding is set =1 I deactivated pf This problem is independent of the cards I use If I install the nic2 first then it will work, but then nic1 does not work. Has anyone an idea what I am missing here? B B KLaus
Kurban Bayramınız Kutlu Olsun
SBS Online Epitime Ba~lad}. Kitap Fiyat}na Epitim 5-6-7-8. S}n}flar 24 Saat Online Epitim SBS' de En B|y|k Kaynak 2009 SBS'de Vrt|~m|~ 100 Soru Deneyimli Vpretmenlerce Haz}rlanan Binlerce SBS Sorusu Toplam 98 Adet vzg|n SBS Deneme S}nav} ]nternet \zerinden Vzg|n,kaliteli SBS Epitimi Bilgisayar} Ders Amagl} Kullan}m Okul-Vprenci-Veli ve Megasoru i~birlipi SBS 'de Mutlak Ba~ar} 15 G|nde Bir Ayr}nt}l} Olarak Veliyi Bilgilendirme Vprenci \yelik Bedeli Bireysel Sat}~: 60 TL (1 y}ll}k |yelik |creti) (Turkcell Mobil Vdemeye 6 Taksit) Not:Sorular}n video gvz|mleri ba~lam}~t}r. Gvrsel ve i~itsel olarak gvz|mleri vprenebilirsiniz. Soruyu sor videolu gvz|m| izle. www.megasoru.com Direkt Bilgi ]gin: 0 532 590 74 75
