On Sun, Aug 08, 2021 at 12:37:54PM +0200, Florian Obser wrote:
> This implements ignoring of nameservers and / or routes in leases as
> well as completely ignoring servers (you cannot block rogue DHCP servers
> in pf because bpf sees packets before pf).
>
> Various people voiced the need for
On Sun 08/08/2021 12:37, Florian Obser wrote:
> This implements ignoring of nameservers and / or routes in leases as
> well as completely ignoring servers (you cannot block rogue DHCP servers
> in pf because bpf sees packets before pf).
>
> Various people voiced the need for these features.
>
On 2021/08/08 10:05, Martijn van Duren wrote:
> > +++ etc/examples/snmpd.conf 7 Aug 2021 21:45:44 -
> > @@ -1,24 +1,26 @@
> > # $OpenBSD: snmpd.conf,v 1.1 2014/07/11 21:20:10 deraadt Exp $
> >
> > -listen_addr="127.0.0.1"
> > +# Default is to listen to all addresses for SNMPv3 only;
On Sun, 2021-08-08 at 13:42 +0200, Ingo Schwarze wrote:
> Hi,
>
> deraadt@ recently reported to me that the editline(3) library, while
> line editing is active - for example inside el_gets(3) - ignores
> the first SIGINT it receives, for example the the first Ctrl-C the
> user presses. I
Hi,
deraadt@ recently reported to me that the editline(3) library, while
line editing is active - for example inside el_gets(3) - ignores
the first SIGINT it receives, for example the the first Ctrl-C the
user presses. I consider that a bug in the editline(3) library.
Some programs, for example
On Sun, Aug 08, 2021 at 12:37:54PM +0200, Florian Obser wrote:
> This implements ignoring of nameservers and / or routes in leases as
> well as completely ignoring servers (you cannot block rogue DHCP servers
> in pf because bpf sees packets before pf).
>
> Various people voiced the need for
This implements ignoring of nameservers and / or routes in leases as
well as completely ignoring servers (you cannot block rogue DHCP servers
in pf because bpf sees packets before pf).
Various people voiced the need for these features.
Tests, OKs?
diff --git dhcpleased.c dhcpleased.c
index
On Sun, 8 Aug 2021 14:38:57 +1000
Jonathan Matthew wrote:
> While working on a new driver, I noticed we have a few places where we
> pass USBD_EXCLUSIVE_USE as the flags parameter to
> usbd_open_pipe_intr(), which is wrong.
>
> The interrupt pipe is always opened exclusively, and the flags
>
On Sat, 2021-08-07 at 22:47 +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> On 2021/08/07 15:17, Martijn van Duren wrote:
> > Let me give one final pushback, if this doesn't convince you then feel
> > free to commit sthen's diff without my OK, but make sure it stays in
> > sync with snmp(1).
>
> I was convinced
