Hello,
On Wed, Dec 27, 2017 at 05:34:28PM +0100, Alexander Bluhm wrote:
> Hi,
>
> pf drops IPv4 packets with options by default. For IPv6 the same
> is done for certain option headers. I think we should add the
> routing header to this list.
>
> ok?
OK sashan@
Hello,
On Tue, Dec 26, 2017 at 10:02:00PM +0100, Alexander Bluhm wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The functions to link the pf state keys always confused me a bit.
> I think the new naming and code of the functions is more consistent.
>
> ok?
I like your change. You have my OK with small change here:
> I
On Wed, Dec 27, 2017 at 10:48:16AM +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote:
>
> > Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2017 09:37:12 +0800
> > From: Kevin Lo
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 26, 2017 at 06:20:59PM +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> > >
> > > > Date: Tue, 26 Dec 2017 22:51:38 +0800
> > > > From: Kevin Lo
> > > >
> > > > > Sho
On Wed, Dec 27, 2017 at 05:09:38AM +0200, Artturi Alm wrote:
>
> On Wed, Dec 27, 2017 at 09:37:12AM +0800, Kevin Lo wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 26, 2017 at 06:20:59PM +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> > >
> > > > Date: Tue, 26 Dec 2017 22:51:38 +0800
> > > > From: Kevin Lo
> > > >
> > > > > Shouldn't be
Hi,
Here are 2 patches to enable IPv6 over VPLS.
One for ldpd(8) and one for the kernel.
Denis
Index: if_ethersubr.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/net/if_ethersubr.c,v
retrieving revision 1.246
diff -u -p -r1.246 if_ethersubr.c
--- if
On Wed, Dec 27 2017, "Theo de Raadt" wrote:
>> > Since timespecs also use tv_* prefixes, a hint about the other sub-second
>> > field is being lost, also, sometimes the clearing of the sub-second field
>> > isn't in the same place it is missing.
>>
>> What do you have in mind when you say "sub-se
> > Since timespecs also use tv_* prefixes, a hint about the other sub-second
> > field is being lost, also, sometimes the clearing of the sub-second field
> > isn't in the same place it is missing.
>
> What do you have in mind when you say "sub-second initialization"? The
> idea is to use time(3
On Wed, Dec 27 2017, "Theo de Raadt" wrote:
>> > I really don't get the cruscade agains gettimeofday(). Despite what
>> > POSIX may say, it is not going away. And what you're proposing isn't
>> > really an optimization. As far as I'm concerned this is just
>> > (unwanted) churn.
>>
>> I don't
Hi Everyone,
After researching this some more I realized that I think this integer
array may be in this structure for padding/data alignment. When I
compile this on a 64-bit computer with -Wpadded I do not receive any
errors regarding this structure, but I think this must have been an
issue with o
> > I really don't get the cruscade agains gettimeofday(). Despite what
> > POSIX may say, it is not going away. And what you're proposing isn't
> > really an optimization. As far as I'm concerned this is just
> > (unwanted) churn.
>
> I don't think there's a crusade here; time(3) gives us shor
On Wed, Dec 27 2017, Mark Kettenis wrote:
>> Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2017 08:52:28 -0600
>> From: Scott Cheloha
>>
>> The timevals in clnt_tcp.c and clnt_udp.c are assigned and never used.
>>
>> The timevals in auth_unix.c are only used for the .tv_sec field, so
>> we can just initialize .aup_time wi
Hi,
pf drops IPv4 packets with options by default. For IPv6 the same
is done for certain option headers. I think we should add the
routing header to this list.
ok?
bluhm
Index: net/pf.c
===
RCS file: /data/mirror/openbsd/cvs/src/
update hardware for sendbug or it could just be removed I think since
the Environment: section will show what your using. So here are two
patches for each.
Index: sendbug.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.bin/sendbug/sendbug.c,v
retrieving
On Wed, Dec 27, 2017 at 04:58:07PM +0100, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> Simpler diff that just do the zeroing, anyone?
OK bluhm@
> Index: kern/uipc_socket.c
> ===
> RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/kern/uipc_socket.c,v
> retrieving revision 1.212
>
On Wed, Dec 27, 2017 at 04:55:49PM +0100, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> Updated diff below.
OK bluhm@
> Index: net/if.c
> ===
> RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/net/if.c,v
> retrieving revision 1.531
> diff -u -p -r1.531 if.c
> --- net/if.c 15 Dec
Hi,
I am trying to make IPv6 over VPLS.
I updated ldpd(8) to install MPLS route for IPv6 nexthop. I can see the routes
but when pinging the destination I get "No route to host". Can someone give me a
pointer for the next step ?
Thank you in advance,
Denis
* Without the patch :
mpls1# route -n s
On 11/12/17(Mon) 08:55, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> Diff below shuffle the socket buffer definition to "properly" memset()
> all required fields in sorflush(). It also gets rid of the sbrelease()
> abstraction since zeroing out `sb_hiwat' and `sb_mbmax' is required in
> only one place.
Simpler diff
On 20/12/17(Wed) 13:43, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> On 19/12/17(Tue) 19:24, Alexander Bluhm wrote:
> > > @@ -2103,8 +2118,6 @@ ifioctl(struct socket *so, u_long cmd, c
> > >
> > > if (((oif_flags ^ ifp->if_flags) & IFF_UP) != 0)
> > > getmicrotime(&ifp->if_lastchange);
> > > -
> > > - NE
> Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2017 08:52:28 -0600
> From: Scott Cheloha
>
> The timevals in clnt_tcp.c and clnt_udp.c are assigned and never used.
>
> The timevals in auth_unix.c are only used for the .tv_sec field, so
> we can just initialize .aup_time with time(3).
>
> ok?
I really don't get the crusc
The timevals in clnt_tcp.c and clnt_udp.c are assigned and never used.
The timevals in auth_unix.c are only used for the .tv_sec field, so
we can just initialize .aup_time with time(3).
ok?
--
Scott Cheloha
Index: lib/libc/rpc/auth_unix.c
Hi,
second step: only init chunk_info on creation. When it is recycled all
values already have proper values to start using it again, e.g. the
free bitmap already has all slots marked free. Plus some moving of
code to get a better grouping of related functions.
-Otto
Index: malloc.c
===
Add WARNINGS=yes to ksh and fix the resulting sign compare warnings.
Still passes regress. Note that gcc is pickier than clang in this
respect as it requires a matching sign for ternary operations.
I tried to limit the use of casts.
- todd
Index: Makefile
==
So I enabled the unmapping of the early bootstrap code on arm64. That
seemed to work, until I saw some random crashes with a previously
"working" kernel. Of course the kernels are being relinked, so
they're never quite the same.
Looking at a failing kernel I noticed that the endboot symbol wasn'
On Tue, Dec 26, 2017 at 10:24:01AM +0200, Lari Rasku wrote:
> Been running a base linked against this on amd64 since the 24th.
> No new problems observed. If there's anything specific I can test
> do tell.
Thanks for testing. I've committed this. Soon a followup will come.
-Otto
> Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2017 09:37:12 +0800
> From: Kevin Lo
>
> On Tue, Dec 26, 2017 at 06:20:59PM +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> >
> > > Date: Tue, 26 Dec 2017 22:51:38 +0800
> > > From: Kevin Lo
> > >
> > > > Shouldn't be too difficult to add support for that one to axppmic(4).
> > > > Do you wa
25 matches
Mail list logo
