Bump.
This patch fixes "runtime" error in libusbhid when parsing usage strings
with usage defined in default usbhid table as a format string.
On Tue, May 29, 2018, 10:29 PM David Bern wrote:
> Sorry for the spamming.
> After some research and finding that my fix for issue nr: 2 (
>
Currently t_template of tcpcb is a mbuf cluster. This happened when
max_linkhdr is increased from 16 to 64 (1.44 of
sys/kern/uipc_domain.c).
I found this because I wonder why my company, IIJ's HTTP proxy servers
started using a lot of mbuf clusters after a certain version.
ok?
It doesn't seem
Let me update the diff
On Tue, 12 Jun 2018 13:39:51 +0900 (JST)
YASUOKA Masahiko wrote:
> Currently t_template of tcpcb is a mbuf cluster. This happened when
> max_linkhdr is increased from 16 to 64 (1.44 of
> sys/kern/uipc_domain.c).
>
> I found this because I wonder why my company, IIJ's
On 06/06/18 13:50, Todd C. Miller wrote:
> On Tue, 05 Jun 2018 16:29:33 -0600, "Theo de Raadt" wrote:
>
>>> + clearstr = "\033[H\033[J";
>>
>> I abhor increasing assumptions that the terminal honours that particular
>> ANSI standard.
>>
>> Sorry, but at that point you have
On Mon, Jun 11 2018, Remi Locherer wrote:
> Hi,
>
> ospf6d does not resend LSAs when a carp interface goes into backup state.
> This is unfortunate since other routers may still use the route to the
> backup router or they even do ECMP and send traffic to the master and backup.
>
> This minimal
On Mon, Jun 11 2018, Remi Locherer wrote:
> Hi,
>
> ospfd sends LSAs with MAX_METRIC for carp interfaces in state backup.
> This does the same for ospf6d.
>
> While here also document how ospf6d treats carp interfaces.
>
> OK?
LGTM, ok jca@
--
jca | PGP : 0x1524E7EE / 5135 92C1 AD36 5293 2BDF
On 2018/06/10 13:20, Il Ka wrote:
> Another approach is to extend subnet by decreasing mask to include router to
> client subnet.
> I.e.: 10.112.38.73/16.
I think that's the wrong approach, because it will send packets directly
to addresses which should be sent to the router.
> From my point of
>Which RFC?
It says "IP addresses for routers on the client's subnet", so my idea was
that router must be on client subnet.
>We already deal with this for the case fairly common in VPS where the
>client gets a /32 with a router outside the subnet
But how does it work from client side?
Does your
Hi,
ospf6d does not resend LSAs when a carp interface goes into backup state.
This is unfortunate since other routers may still use the route to the
backup router or they even do ECMP and send traffic to the master and backup.
This minimal diff adds braces to fix it:
Index: rde.c
Hi,
ospfd sends LSAs with MAX_METRIC for carp interfaces in state backup.
This does the same for ospf6d.
While here also document how ospf6d treats carp interfaces.
OK?
Remi
Index: ospf6d.conf.5
===
RCS file:
On 2018/06/11 07:39, Il Ka wrote:
> >Which RFC?
> It says "IP addresses for routers on the client's subnet", so my idea was
> that router must be on client subnet.
>
> >We already deal with this for the case fairly common in VPS where the
> >client gets a /32 with a router outside the subnet
>
>>This cannot possibly work, the client can't find the
lladdr of the gateway
Oops, I now see my experiment was not valid: dhcpcd adds route to router but
can't reach it.
I added alias and it now works, thank you.
So, dhcp client assumes that router anounced by server is always reachable
by
Dear all,
Managing the flow of email coming from cron(8) can be a challenge,
especially when you manage a lot of machines. A pattern I see in system
administration is that either a ton of logic is put in wrappers/scripts
to sensibly deal with any output - or even worse all output is zapped
with
13 matches
Mail list logo
