Re: Executing rc.d on rdomain != 0

On Tue, 19 Feb 2019 22:33:53 -0700 "Theo de Raadt" wrote: > I think that's really gross. > > route domains are a concept usable by some people, not everyone should > need to see this. Ah, may be yes. I am using sshd on routing domain other than 0, but actually I'll add "RDomain 0" to sshd_confi

Re: Executing rc.d on rdomain != 0

I think that's really gross. route domains are a concept usable by some people, not everyone should need to see this. > I think rc.d should specify the routing domain explicitly when it > executes the daemon program even if the daemon's rtable is configured > 0 since the executed routing domain m

Executing rc.d on rdomain != 0

Hi! I think rc.d should specify the routing domain explicitly when it executes the daemon program even if the daemon's rtable is configured 0 since the executed routing domain may not be 0. Exmaple: (run sshd on rtable 100) $ doas ifconfig lo100 rdomain 100 127.0.0.1/8 $ doas ln -s sshd /e

Re: ioctls for MPLS pseudowire interface config

jsg@ pointed out that stsp sniped the ioctl numbers i was using. this diff moves them into 220-212. On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 01:33:00PM +1000, David Gwynne wrote: > This splits up the mpw config ioctl so the same functionality is > implemented in a bunch of smaller and more specific ioctls. This >

ioctls for MPLS pseudowire interface config

This splits up the mpw config ioctl so the same functionality is implemented in a bunch of smaller and more specific ioctls. This simplifies configuration of an interface cos you can incrementally configure it instead of having to line up all the bits correctly for the jumbo ioctl. It also allows

Re: strptime: %e and leading space

On Sun, Feb 17, 2019 at 08:45:18PM -0500, Ted Unangst wrote: > However, later it adds: > Several "equivalent to" formats and the special processing of white-space > characters are provided in order to ease the use of identical format strings > for strftime() and strptime(). Well, that sounds like j

Re: bgpd use long long instead of int64_t

On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 09:28:36AM +0100, Claudio Jeker wrote: > On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 12:10:25AM +0100, Andreas Kusalananda Kähäri wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 10:11:03PM +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote: > > > > Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2019 21:59:38 +0100 > > > > From: Claudio Jeker > > > > > > >

ix transmit code doesn't need atomic ops

mpi's recent post about vlan performance which happened to use ix reminded me that i had some diffz for ix that may be relevant to the discussion. this uses the loads and stores of the produce and consumer indexes to calculate free space in the start path and for figuring out how much space to rec

Re: httpd(8): add support for FastCGI parameters

On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 08:05:14PM +0100, Florian Obser wrote: > On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 12:17:31PM +0200, Paul Irofti wrote: > > On Sun, Feb 17, 2019 at 11:57:20AM +0100, Florian Obser wrote: > > > On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 05:02:47PM +0200, Paul Irofti wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > This patch

security.html -> patch

Hi @all, in an attachment you can find one more patch for *security.html page. Link: https://www.openbsd.org/security.html please confirm. -Oleg Pahl Index: security.html === RCS file: /cvs/www/security.html,v retrieving revis

athn(4): explicit timing of control frames

Our athn(4) driver currently doesn't configure timing of control frames generated in hardware. It keeps using whatever magic numbers our init vals arrays are setting up. With this diff we update the chip with the same values as used by Linux when configuration changes occur. I don't notice any dif

Re: athn(4) bpf tap short-preamble fix

On Fri, Feb 01, 2019 at 03:22:41PM +0100, Stefan Sperling wrote: > This fixes a cosmetic issue: > > tcpdump -n -i athn0 -y IEEE802_11_RADIO shows a SHORTPRE flag on most frames > sent from athn0. Even for OFDM frames. Which is bogus because short preamble > only applies to non-OFDM frames with Tx

Re: security.html -> broken link

On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 09:49:15AM GMT, Oleg Pahl wrote: > Hi @all, > > On https://www.openbsd.org/security.html there is a broken link. > > > ---> > > > Full Disclosure > > Like many readers of theBUGTRAQ mailing list > , we believe in ful

Re: add getrun for rcctl(8)

Hi, On Mon, 18 Feb 2019 10:24:51 + Stuart Henderson wrote: > There's a safer way, you can obtain reliable current information about > the rtable for a process from ps. Yes. But what I wanted to do is applying rtable changes by rc.conf to the daemon if needed. Running daemon's rtable may be

security.html -> broken link

Hi @all, On https://www.openbsd.org/security.html there is a broken link. ---> Full Disclosure Like many readers of theBUGTRAQ mailing list , we believe in full disclosure of security problems. * http://online.securityfocus.com/archive

Re: bgpd use long long instead of int64_t

On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 12:10:25AM +0100, Andreas Kusalananda Kähäri wrote: > On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 10:11:03PM +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote: > > > Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2019 21:59:38 +0100 > > > From: Claudio Jeker > > > > > > In some places bgpd just wants something bigger then a 32bit int. > > > In