Le 16 juil. 2014 22:39, Rafał Miłecki zaj...@gmail.com a écrit :
On 11 July 2014 10:04, Jo-Philipp Wich j...@openwrt.org wrote:
Thats due to the varnish cache, it strips all incoming cookies for
non-authenticated users.
Is there some chance to fix this, please?
Create an account? (If it's
Hi,
On 17 July 2014 12:06, Yousong Zhou yszhou4t...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
On 14 July 2014 07:39, Yousong Zhou yszhou4t...@gmail.com wrote:
A WARN_ON_ONCE() dump was triggered on a MT7620A based device with
following config. Ticket #17032 can be closed with this patch.
There are other flaws
On 16.07.2014 22:41, Gui Iribarren wrote:
On 16/07/14 16:21, Bill Moffitt wrote:
However, for the moment, I would argue that the rightness of following
expected behavior is greater than the rightness of delivering the true
end-to-end nature of v6.
At least Swisscom (according to Baptiste)
On 16/07/2014 00:07, Hauke Mehrtens wrote:
On 07/15/2014 07:06 PM, Bruno Randolf wrote:
Another problem I noted when upgrading from AA to BB on MTX-1:
# sysupgrade -n
/tmp/openwrt-au1000-au1500-jffs2-128k-sysupgrade.bin tar:
openwrt-au1000-au1500-jffs2-128k.fs: not found in archive
Hi Dirk,
thanks for your help. I'll try to add some more documentation for the
IPv6 stuff in the near future.
In general the aim is to make stuff comply with RFC 7084 (successor of
6204) as closely as possible (with only 1 or 2 exceptions on purpose).
In general I'm not sure if anyone has
Dne 16.7.2014 22:41, Gui Iribarren napsal(a):
I expect that, over time, users will become accustomed to the
end-to-end nature of the v6 Internet and may demand that the firewall
be open by default, and I would certainly propose that we have a
simple checkbox in LUCI that allows the
2014-07-16 20:51 GMT+02:00 Bastian Bittorf bitt...@bluebottle.com:
my feedreader was used to fetch
https://dev.openwrt.org/log/trunk?limit=100mode=stop_on_copyformat=rss
but this stopped working around 13. july 13:00
why? what should i use now?
bastian
Hi Bastian,
i'm using the rss feed
Hi John and all,
On 07/17/2014 08:14 AM, John Crispin wrote:
au1000 was not updated for BB and as you see there is some work missing.
feel free to send a patch to fix the sysupgrade issue. Once that is
done and if you volunteert to maintain au1000 for BB, then we culd add
it to the list of
On 15 July 2014 19:40, John Crispin j...@phrozen.org wrote:
Hi,
lovely, works for me on the 6 boards that i tested. will merge it in a
sec.
i will look into the fixme bits.
So, if nothing is wrong, could it be applied?
Regards,
Roman
___
On 17/07/2014 12:53, Roman Yeryomin wrote:
On 15 July 2014 19:40, John Crispin j...@phrozen.org wrote:
Hi,
lovely, works for me on the 6 boards that i tested. will merge it
in a sec.
i will look into the fixme bits.
So, if nothing is wrong, could it be applied?
Regards, Roman
ASL-26555 16MB: caldata is present on uboot-env and devdata, but the proper one
seems to be the devdata, since mac address corresponds to Amper, the real
manufacturer, meanwhile the caldata on uboot-env corresponds to D-Link.
ASL-26555 8MB: caldata is only present on uboot-env, but its mac
Hello guys,
This discussion if becoming each day more confusing for something, which
for me, is very simple assuming the following:
- IPv6 as IPv4 should block *any incoming connection* on the WAN
interface including those directed to the LAN IPs behind it.
- If a client in the LAN
Hi,
I am currently adding GRE support for OpenWRT, based on 6in4 support [1]
(since I couldn't find any documentation).
What is the proper way to support address configuration for tunnel
interfaces? It seems redundant to handle static address configuration for
each tunnel type, especially with
Hallo Jow,
thank you for your fast reply.
So far I see there are subtargets needed because each board has another
kernel image (name?).
KERNELNAME:=uImage dtbImage.rb600 dtbImage.rb333
Claudio
On 15.07.2014 15:23, Jo-Philipp Wich wrote:
Hi.
Profiles influence image generation and package
On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 03:21:32PM +0100, Fernando Frediani wrote:
Hello guys,
This discussion if becoming each day more confusing for something, which for
me, is very simple assuming the following:
- IPv6 as IPv4 should block *any incoming connection* on the WAN
interface including
This can serve as a convenience for sync requets, since no explicit
ubus_connect() + ubus_free() need to be done.
It can also help in cases where there are async + sync requests,
where one async request is working and sync calls are done.
Seems to create some weird races, probably because of
Forgot to add Github link for easier review.
https://github.com/commodo/ubus/commit/f8942190ea7ff4a243410aa0a9d38eacd41d0b4a
On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 6:25 PM, Alexandru Ardelean ardeleana...@gmail.com
wrote:
This can serve as a convenience for sync requets, since no explicit
ubus_connect() +
On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 11:23 AM, Baptiste Jonglez bjong...@illyse.org wrote:
... without having to explicitely configure your firewall.
And this is the opinion that I, and many others, disagree with.
I look at it from the principle of minimizing the worst case scenario.
We could allow all (or
Hello Baptiste,
Clarifying my point should I meant From common sense and also From
Widely accepted practice.
One that may use applications that may need to be reachable from outside
can adjust the firewall manually to reflect that for the desired ports
which is not a big deal, or even by
Hi Baptiste,
I have added GRE support (gre/gretap/grev6/grev6tap) in netifd which I'm
currenlty testing. The implementation looks the same as for 6rd/dslite tunnel
interfaces (thus allowing to set mtu/ttl/remote end point); additonally it
allows to set gre specific parameters
On 2014-07-17 17:25, Alexandru Ardelean wrote:
This can serve as a convenience for sync requets, since no explicit
ubus_connect() + ubus_free() need to be done.
It can also help in cases where there are async + sync requests,
where one async request is working and sync calls are done.
Seems
On 2014-07-16 11:43, Maciej Skrzypek wrote:
mtd: allow partial block erase
This fixes error erasing partial mtd partition which does not start on
eraseblock boundary and allows using fconfig to configure redboot on
devices such as the Gateworks Cambria.
fixed in all kernels and folded in
On 2014-07-15 15:53, Jonas Gorski wrote:
On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 1:57 AM, Sergey Ryazanov ryazanov@gmail.com
wrote:
Main goals of this series:
* Simplify interface between arch code and SoC drivers
* Simplify internal realization of arch code
* Make code consistent with mainstream
On 2014-07-13 16:09, Sergey Ryazanov wrote:
Declare inline placeholder when usb_hcd_amd_remote_wakeup_quirk() not
compiled due CONFIG_PCI_DISABLE_COMMON_QUIRKS.
Signed-off-by: Sergey Ryazanov ryazanov@gmail.com
Applied in r41702, thanks.
- Felix
On 2014-07-15 01:57, Sergey Ryazanov wrote:
Main goals of this series:
* Simplify interface between arch code and SoC drivers
* Simplify internal realization of arch code
* Make code consistent with mainstream kernel rules and practice
This series extensively tested with FON2202 (ar2315
Le mercredi 16 juillet 2014 à 15:58 -0400, Aaron Z a écrit :
IMO, it comes down to trust:
Do you trust that the people who made your NAS, blueray player, etc
will release patches when exploits are found 3 years down the road? I
don't.
Do you trust that the people who made the firmware for
Le mercredi 16 juillet 2014 à 21:12 +0200, Sebastian Moeller a écrit :
What is so wonderful about IPv6? Maleware surely will evolve quickly
to take advantage of a dropped layer of defense…
“Layer of defense”? To most, it will just translate to a brick wall that
will have to be worked
Le mercredi 16 juillet 2014 à 21:12 +0200, Sebastian Moeller a écrit :
What is so wonderful about IPv6? Maleware surely will evolve quickly
to take advantage of a dropped layer of defense…
“Layer of defense”? To most, it will just translate to a brick wall that
will have to be worked
Fair enough.
Will reconsider approach in our code.
If I think about it, there may be an approach (in our code) which
requires fewer changes than this patch, and may even be more elegant.
Thanks and apologies for the noise.
On 7/17/14, Felix Fietkau n...@openwrt.org wrote:
On 2014-07-17 17:25,
Hi Bill,
Le mercredi 16 juillet 2014 à 12:21 -0700, Bill Moffitt a écrit :
All these routers today, of course, necessarily come NATted, meaning no
ports are open to the Internet. Users are accustomed to being able to
connect their computers to the router's network and be shielded from
Hello Benjamin,
On July 17, 2014 7:45:10 PM CEST, Benjamin Cama ben...@dolka.fr wrote:
Le mercredi 16 juillet 2014 à 21:12 +0200, Sebastian Moeller a écrit :
What is so wonderful about IPv6? Maleware surely will evolve quickly
to take advantage of a dropped layer of defense…
“Layer of
The default case in 02_network is inappropriate for the MikroTik RouterBOARD
91x boards because they do not have a WAN port, so don't bother setting the
non-existent eth1 interface as the WAN port.
Signed-off-by: Matthew Reeve mre...@tenxnetworks.com
---
On 07/17/2014 08:26 PM, Sebastian Moeller wrote:
I argue that people unable to change the router settings are better of
with all unsolicited inbound traffic disabled.
I've tried to avoid weighing in on this, but I'd argue that you're wrong :)
Making sure that people can _never_
I know that IPv6 designers pine for the good old days of the Internet when no
security was needed.
But the reality is that hackers and worms have shown that leaving systems
exposed to the Internet is just a Bad Idea.
As such, the idea that IPv6 would restore the everyone can connect to
Perfect and well said.
Really don't see why people still think leaving firewalls opened is a
good idea.
At the end it will bring more problems than solutions for those using
OpenWRT and play against its good reputation.
As mentioned before adjusting firewall for specific needs or using UPnP
On 17/07/14 21:03, David Lang wrote:
I know that IPv6 designers pine for the good old days of the Internet
when no security was needed.
But the reality is that hackers and worms have shown that leaving
systems exposed to the Internet is just a Bad Idea.
As such, the idea that IPv6 would
On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 06:28:09PM +0200, Hans Dedecker wrote:
Hi Baptiste,
I have added GRE support (gre/gretap/grev6/grev6tap) in netifd which I'm
currenlty testing. The implementation looks the same as for 6rd/dslite tunnel
interfaces (thus allowing to set mtu/ttl/remote end point);
On 17/07/14 21:59, Fernando Frediani wrote:
Perfect and well said.
Really don't see why people still think leaving firewalls opened is a
good idea.
leaving *hosts* firewalls opened is a really bad idea. Agreed.
But openwrt doesn't run on hosts, it runs on network equipment
I.e. the building
Hi,
A typical home connection is not an ISP.
Also OpenWRT for the majority of the cases isn't just 'a router', but
also as a firewall and to protect user's network either on IPv4 or IPv6,
not just a dummy bridge device.
I guess I see the good intentions of those defending it should be
This patch adds support for the Ubiquiti Networks airGateway.
Based in part on code posted by David Hutchison dhutchi...@bluemesh.net on
openwrt-devel:
https://lists.openwrt.org/pipermail/openwrt-devel/2013-December/023035.html
Signed-off-by: Matthew Reeve mre...@tenxnetworks.com
---
I created several new gstreamer module packages (v4l2 for example),
they update makefiles and add some patches.
But now I confused with paths, after update gstreamer was moved to
the oldpackages directory. Which path patch should contain ?
to quote Steven Barth who replied to a similar
41 matches
Mail list logo
