Hi,
On Tue, 2 Nov 2021 07:03:43 +
Jason McIntyre wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 02, 2021 at 12:02:07PM +0900, YASUOKA Masahiko wrote:
>> I'd like to clarify "aes" in ipsec.conf accepts 128:256 bits.
>>
>> sbin/ipsecctl/ike.c:
>> 201 case ENCXF_AES:
>> 202
On Tue, 2 Nov 2021, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> Paul de Weerd wrote:
>
> > A recent commit by Theo changed the hw.perfpolicy behavior to always
> > run at full speed when AC power is on. This means that my workstation
> > (and servers, once I upgrade them) now consumes significantly more
> > power,
I am sure swabips died before you were born.
Klemens Nanni wrote:
> No idea what it was supposed to do back then; cvs blame points at
>
> revision 1.19
> date: 1998/09/03 06:24:18; author: jason; state: Exp; lines: +502
> -38;
> o OpenBSD gets if_media support (from
No idea what it was supposed to do back then; cvs blame points at
revision 1.19
date: 1998/09/03 06:24:18; author: jason; state: Exp; lines: +502
-38;
o OpenBSD gets if_media support (from NetBSD)
o rework/simplify if_xl to use
OK?
Index: ifconfig.c
On Tue, 02 Nov 2021 22:22:16 -, Klemens Nanni wrote:
> I looked at
> I had to look at the source to be sure what the three different return
> codes 0, 1 and 2 would mean and if there was more to it.
>
> Depending on the error, config(8) exists 1 or 2. 0 on success as usual.
OK millert@
-
I looked at
I had to look at the source to be sure what the three different return
codes 0, 1 and 2 would mean and if there was more to it.
Depending on the error, config(8) exists 1 or 2. 0 on success as usual.
OK?
Index: config.8
On Tue, Nov 02, 2021 at 06:38:24PM +0100, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> It looks like bwfm(4) does support WEP but the C_WEP capability is missing
> from ic_caps so net80211 believes WEP was not supported by this driver.
>
> I don't think we have any supported wifi device that does not support WEP.
>
Solene Rapenne wrote:
> On mardi 2 novembre 2021 19:19:03 CET, Paul de Weerd wrote:
> > A recent commit by Theo changed the hw.perfpolicy behavior to always
> > run at full speed when AC power is on. This means that my workstation
> > (and servers, once I upgrade them) now consumes
> Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2021 19:19:03 +0100
> From: Paul de Weerd
>
> A recent commit by Theo changed the hw.perfpolicy behavior to always
> run at full speed when AC power is on. This means that my workstation
> (and servers, once I upgrade them) now consumes significantly more
> power, even though
Paul de Weerd wrote:
> A recent commit by Theo changed the hw.perfpolicy behavior to always
> run at full speed when AC power is on. This means that my workstation
> (and servers, once I upgrade them) now consumes significantly more
> power, even though they usually idle.
Did you measure how
Paul de Weerd wrote:
> A recent commit by Theo changed the hw.perfpolicy behavior to always
> run at full speed when AC power is on. This means that my workstation
> (and servers, once I upgrade them) now consumes significantly more
> power, even though they usually idle.
Did you measure how
A recent commit by Theo changed the hw.perfpolicy behavior to always
run at full speed when AC power is on. This means that my workstation
(and servers, once I upgrade them) now consumes significantly more
power, even though they usually idle.
[weerd@pom] $ sysctl
On Tue, Nov 02, 2021 at 11:30:11AM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> Klemens Nanni wrote:
>
> > At least bwfm(4) does not support WEP:
> >
> > # ifconfig bwfm0 nwkey 12345
> > ifconfig: SIOCS80211NWKEY: Operation not supported by device
> > # echo $?
> > 0
> >
> >
On Tue, Nov 02, 2021 at 05:26:17PM +, Klemens Nanni wrote:
> At least bwfm(4) does not support WEP:
>
> # ifconfig bwfm0 nwkey 12345
> ifconfig: SIOCS80211NWKEY: Operation not supported by device
> # echo $?
> 0
>
> ifconfig(8) must return non-zero in this
On Tue, Nov 02, 2021 at 05:26:17PM +, Klemens Nanni wrote:
> At least bwfm(4) does not support WEP:
>
> # ifconfig bwfm0 nwkey 12345
> ifconfig: SIOCS80211NWKEY: Operation not supported by device
> # echo $?
> 0
>
> ifconfig(8) must return non-zero in this
Klemens Nanni wrote:
> At least bwfm(4) does not support WEP:
>
> # ifconfig bwfm0 nwkey 12345
> ifconfig: SIOCS80211NWKEY: Operation not supported by device
> # echo $?
> 0
>
> ifconfig(8) must return non-zero in this case.
>
> This is relevant for an
I've recently started seeing a number of flaps with ospfd/ospf6d
with invalid seq nums / "seq num mismatch, bad flags" logged.
Not quite sure what's going yet as they must be occurring on
various local switched segments on one nic and also on ethernet
wan circuits direct to router on a separate
At least bwfm(4) does not support WEP:
# ifconfig bwfm0 nwkey 12345
ifconfig: SIOCS80211NWKEY: Operation not supported by device
# echo $?
0
ifconfig(8) must return non-zero in this case.
This is relevant for an upcoming installer fix, but also worth
On Mon, Nov 01, 2021 at 12:56:26PM +0100, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> This patch adds 802.11n 40MHz support to the iwn(4) driver.
>
> This driver supports many different devices. Please try to be precise
> about which device you have tested so I can maintain a record of our
> test coverage.
Here is
On Tue, Nov 02, 2021 at 08:12:00AM -0600, Todd C. Miller wrote:
> On Mon, 01 Nov 2021 21:04:54 -0500, Scott Cheloha wrote:
>
> > Yes it would be simpler. However I didn't want to start changing the
> > input -- which we currently don't do -- without discussing it.
> >
> > The standard says we
Hi Todd,
Todd C. Miller wrote on Tue, Nov 02, 2021 at 08:20:47AM -0600:
> uniq appeared in research Unix version 3.
OK schwarze@.
If - like in this case - the indicated release is the first one in any
system to ever contain the feature, and not just the first one among
the direct ancestors of
Hi,
Todd C. Miller wrote on Tue, Nov 02, 2021 at 08:12:00AM -0600:
> On Mon, 01 Nov 2021 21:04:54 -0500, Scott Cheloha wrote:
>> Yes it would be simpler. However I didn't want to start changing the
>> input -- which we currently don't do -- without discussing it.
>>
>> The standard says we
uniq appeared in research Unix version 3.
- todd
Index: usr.bin/uniq/uniq.1
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.bin/uniq/uniq.1,v
retrieving revision 1.21
diff -u -p -u -r1.21 uniq.1
--- usr.bin/uniq/uniq.1 23 Dec 2017 00:52:33 -
Actually, the historic version of uniq used static 1000 byte buffers.
Solaris 2.6 includes a version that realloc()s the buffer but I
don't know when exactly that behavior was added.
- todd
> Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2021 15:05:46 +0100
> From: Frederic Cambus
>
> On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 06:20:07PM -0400, Brad Smith wrote:
>
> > > Therefore, here is a diff to enable spleen16x32 and spleen32x64 on riscv64
> > > for GENERIC kernels, like we do on amd64, arm64, armv7, and i386.
> > >
> > >
On Mon, 01 Nov 2021 21:04:54 -0500, Scott Cheloha wrote:
> Yes it would be simpler. However I didn't want to start changing the
> input -- which we currently don't do -- without discussing it.
>
> The standard says we should "write one copy of each input line on the
> output." So, if we are
On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 06:20:07PM -0400, Brad Smith wrote:
> > Therefore, here is a diff to enable spleen16x32 and spleen32x64 on riscv64
> > for GENERIC kernels, like we do on amd64, arm64, armv7, and i386.
> >
> > Comments? OK?
>
> Sounds like this should be enabled on powerpc64 too?
I got
On Tue, Oct 26, 2021 at 01:24:30PM +, Klemens Nanni wrote:
> Mentioning `route nameserver' relevance made it obvious that the
> `preference' block duplicates lots of information and I despise adding
> to that.
route(8) is fixed/polished, unwind.conf(5) still lacks behind.
> So rearrange the
On Tue, Nov 02, 2021 at 12:02:07PM +0900, YASUOKA Masahiko wrote:
> I'd like to clarify "aes" in ipsec.conf accepts 128:256 bits.
>
> sbin/ipsecctl/ike.c:
> 201 case ENCXF_AES:
> 202 enc_alg = "AES";
> 203
On Tue, Nov 02, 2021 at 12:04:25PM +0900, YASUOKA Masahiko wrote:
> ok?
>
> Clarify that ANY can be used for several parameters of IPsec transform.
>
> Index: sbin/isakmpd/isakmpd.conf.5
> ===
> RCS file:
30 matches
Mail list logo
