- Discuss - lists.centos.org

RE: RE: Re: Re: [CentOS] CentOS Based Fierwall Document
by pctech＠mybellybutton.com 05 Aug '06

05 Aug '06

>On Fri, 4 Aug 2006, pctech(a)mybellybutton.com wrote: > >> Wrong...His FIRST e-mail said, "Who are you and why should we care?" >> and THAT is when I responded the way I did. > >And was that the best way to respond ? > >You could have said who you were, and why your firewall document is >important to the community. Or simply ignored him. > Maybe I did overreact. And the onus is on me for that. However, he shouldn't have fricken posted if he didn't care. I apologize to the group, as a whole for the overreaction. However, I won't respond for "sticking up for myself" when I was flamed. The forums for CentOS set the tone for WHY I overreacted. Right or wrong, the vocal "minotiry" of any group sets the "public face" of that group. You can have 500 people, but if the 10 "loudest" people in the group act in a certain manner then the group as a whole gets the reputation of being that way. >Kind regards, >-- dag wieers, dag(a)wieers.com, http://dag.wieers.com/ -- >[all I want is a warm bed and a kind word and unlimited power] >_______________________________________________ >CentOS mailing list >CentOS(a)centos.org >http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

3 2

RE: Re: [CentOS] CentOS Based Infromational Document
by pctech＠mybellybutton.com 05 Aug '06

05 Aug '06

>John Masters wrote: >> >> >> On 8/4/06, *Paul Heinlein* <heinlein(a)madboa.com >> <mailto:heinlein@madboa.com>> wrote: >> >> >> You forgot to politely inquire about the identity of this "Matthew >> Miller.". >> >> >> I resent the implication that my mental facilities are impaired. Or, >> in the words of the Carry On team "Infamy, Infamy, they've all got it >> in for me." > ><tinfoil hat> > >Hey, just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get >you.... > ></tinfoil hat> > You know what? Forget it. It's not worth all of the bullshit. I will just keep my documents and such to myself. I was gonna upload it to the wiki site. That's what I get for trying to be helpful. No good deed goes unpunished I guess. I will go back to lurking since the information that I wanted to impart isn't; this has been made readily apparent to me; wanted nor appreciated. Now I know why TLDP doesn't have many current documents. > >_______________________________________________ >CentOS mailing list >CentOS(a)centos.org >http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

3 2

RE: Re: [CentOS] CentOS Based Fierwall Document
by pctech＠mybellybutton.com 05 Aug '06

05 Aug '06

>pctech(a)mybellybutton.com wrote: >>> Well, with an attitude like that, I can say that I don't think your >>> absence on the list will be missed. That's a mighty big chip on your >>> shoulder. It must be heavy. >>> >>> *shrug* >>> >>> >> >> And YOU wouldn't have a big chip on your shoulder if you OFFERED something >you worked for many months on up to people and got flamed for your troubles? >> > > >Nobody flamed you. Someone who was likely quite busy asked in a curt >way who you were why your message was relevant. The flaming didn't >begin until you started behaving like a scorned girlfriend over it. Get >over it already. You're simply digging yourself in deeper. Just stop it. > >sheeesh.... > If he was so fricken busy why did he even bother to reply? I will tell you why. He was having a bad day and decided that he needed to vent on someone. The problem is he picked someone that will stick up for themselves. > >_______________________________________________ >CentOS mailing list >CentOS(a)centos.org >http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

4 3

Re: [CentOS] Centos Based Fierwall Document
by Ian Kaufman 05 Aug '06

05 Aug '06

>>"For those of us who have neither?" > > Yeah. Because this statement doesn't give the tone of overt hostility at all.....*eyeroll* I see no hostility in someone asking a question that directly acknowledges what your original post stated: "For those of you that either have an older revision of my firewall document, or are otherwise keeping track of it, there is a new version available." He plainly asks what if we don't have the older version or are not keeping track of it, but are otherwise interested? I think you are reading in to it too much. Someone not privy to your original thread announcing the document shows interest, and you basically retort it's none of his business (and less politely I might add). Now who's the elitist? Ian

3 2

RE: Re: [CentOS] CentOS Based Fierwall Document
by pctech＠mybellybutton.com 05 Aug '06

05 Aug '06

>Frank Tanner III wrote: >> >> My characterization of the community is spot-on with regards to >> the way >> that I have been treated both on the forums and in the mailing >> list >> over-all. >> >> I go out of my way to provide a document that I think might be >> useful to >> others and get nothing but harsh criticism for it. How would >> YOU feel >> if the roles were reversed? I wasn't looking for a "Thank you >> thank you >> for providing a wonderful document.", however I was not looking >> for a >> "You asshole. We have no idea what you are talking about. Piss >> off." >> either. And the latter is what I got. >> >> This whole thing could have been avoided had he either not >> responded at >> all if the message didn't concern him, respond with some USEFUL >> feedback, or apologize for being a jerk to begin with. >> >> As far as the "community" as a whole, go out there and read the >> trade >> publications and the publications that business decision makers >> base >> their decisions about the community on. They all, pretty much, >> say the >> same thing. Open Source is great. The people are not. That's >> what it >> boils down to. >> >> > > >Well, with an attitude like that, I can say that I don't think your >absence on the list will be missed. That's a mighty big chip on your >shoulder. It must be heavy. > >*shrug* > And YOU wouldn't have a big chip on your shoulder if you OFFERED something you worked for many months on up to people and got flamed for your troubles? > >_______________________________________________ >CentOS mailing list >CentOS(a)centos.org >http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

5 4

RE: Re: [CentOS] CentOS Based Fierwall Document
by pctech＠mybellybutton.com 04 Aug '06

04 Aug '06

>Frank Tanner III wrote: > >> There goes YOUR attitude again. I *SPECIFICALLY* stated in my initial >> e-mail "or those of you that either have an older revision of my >> firewall document, or are otherwise keeping track of it, there is a new >> version available.". > >if you want your own private mailing list, go start one. bye bye! If you >are going to post something here, making it meaningful to people who >read the list - is a good thing, and expected from all posters. > It *WAS* meaningful. For the people that it was applicable to. Then people decided that because it wasn't applicable to them that they should flame me. It's attitudes such as this as to why people say, "You can never get good support with Open Source software." I came onto the list trying to be HJELPFUL, and got burnt to the ground instead. JUST like in the forums. I guess they'er right. No good deed goes unpunished. Now I understand why nobody has offered a document like this to the community before. It certainly makes me want to keep all of my future documents to myself. They're OBVIOUSLY only a bother to everyone and nobody wants them. >-K >-- >Karanbir Singh {kbsingh(a)centos.org} >The CentOS Project, http://www.centos.org/ >_______________________________________________ >CentOS mailing list >CentOS(a)centos.org >http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

3 2

CentOS Based Fierwall Document
by pctech＠mybellybutton.com 04 Aug '06

04 Aug '06

For those of you that either have an older revision of my firewall document, or are otherwise keeping track of it, there is a new version available. The current version of the document is version 3.1. It's changed rather significantly in some areas.

15 26

RE: Re: Re: [CentOS] Centos Based Fierwall Document
by pctech＠mybellybutton.com 04 Aug '06

04 Aug '06

>> Well, that's not the way it came across. > >To you perhaps. They have medications to help with this. >If you think that one or two people are being hostile, then maybe they >are. When you're operating under the impression that EVERYONE is being >hostile to you... you have to at least consider the possibility that >it's NOT THEM with the issues. > >Grow the thickness of skin required to survive on mailing lists and >irc. Don't respond to hostile posts with hostility, you'll only draw >fire. EIther contribute, or quit whining about how you're being >persecuted. You've been offered at least 3 different hosting areas >during this trainwreck of a thread. > Actually, I've been chatting online for about 20 years now. First on BBSes and then in IRC. Again, the CentOS forums and the people on this mailing list that I had problems with are the only ones that I have encountered this issue with. Those offers came AFTER the flame-fest began, not before. >To everyone else: > >LET THIS THREAD DIE THE DEATH IT DESERVES. > > > >-- >During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary >act. >George Orwell >_______________________________________________ >CentOS mailing list >CentOS(a)centos.org >http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

2 1

RE: Re: [CentOS] Centos Based Fierwall Document
by pctech＠mybellybutton.com 04 Aug '06

04 Aug '06

>>>"For those of us who have neither?" >> >> Yeah. Because this statement doesn't give the tone of overt hostility at >all.....*eyeroll* > >I see no hostility in someone asking a question that directly acknowledges >what your original post stated: > >"For those of you that either have an older revision of my firewall document, >or are otherwise keeping track of it, there is a new version available." > >He plainly asks what if we don't have the older version or are not keeping >track >of it, but are otherwise interested? I think you are reading in to it too >much. >Someone not privy to your original thread announcing the document shows >interest, >and you basically retort it's none of his business (and less politely I might >add). > >Now who's the elitist? > Well, that's not the way it came across. >Ian >_______________________________________________ >CentOS mailing list >CentOS(a)centos.org >http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

2 1

RE: Re: [CentOS] Centos Based Fierwall Document
by pctech＠mybellybutton.com 04 Aug '06

04 Aug '06

>> Well, that's not the way it came across. > >And now you see how one misinterpretation fuels the fires of a flamewar. >Hence, my advice - do not let your preconceived notions of how a >community's minority might react color your participation in said >community. Obviously you want to participate and obviously you have >somethign to share. That is the crux of Open Source. The "elitist" attitude >is not as widely pervasive as people like to think, it's just the >press and others grasp onto the minority of outspoken member of the >community and nobody writes about the droves of people who are >genuinely helpful. > >Plop your docs onto the CentOS wiki - and be prepared - you might get some >criticism since it will be out in public. But, you also might receive some >praise. Constructive criticism of the document I don't mind. That's how I improve it. Alot of the changes of the document came through constructive criticism and/or feedback. Such as the "headless operation" portion of it. In fact, the document recently went throguh a significant re-write due to my own criticism of the document when I built the firewall I will be deploying this weekend. I found that the anti-virus solution broke something I was trying to accomplish, so I removed it until I can find a better solution. I also added an additional "helpful script". Just a bunch of things. >And don't further fuel the negative press of our elitist community >by being elitist yourself ;) Someone just stumbling on this list for the >first time probably just got a huge bad first impression of you. Now's a >good time to correct that impression. > >Ian >_______________________________________________ >CentOS mailing list >CentOS(a)centos.org >http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

1 0

Re: [CentOS] Centos Based Fierwall Document
by Ian Kaufman 04 Aug '06

04 Aug '06

> Well, that's not the way it came across. And now you see how one misinterpretation fuels the fires of a flamewar. Hence, my advice - do not let your preconceived notions of how a community's minority might react color your participation in said community. Obviously you want to participate and obviously you have somethign to share. That is the crux of Open Source. The "elitist" attitude is not as widely pervasive as people like to think, it's just the press and others grasp onto the minority of outspoken member of the community and nobody writes about the droves of people who are genuinely helpful. Plop your docs onto the CentOS wiki - and be prepared - you might get some criticism since it will be out in public. But, you also might receive some praise. And don't further fuel the negative press of our elitist community by being elitist yourself ;) Someone just stumbling on this list for the first time probably just got a huge bad first impression of you. Now's a good time to correct that impression. Ian

2 1

RE: Re: [CentOS] Centos Based Fierwall Document
by pctech＠mybellybutton.com 04 Aug '06

04 Aug '06

>Frank, > >The glory of Google's gmail has allowed me to view this entire thread in it's >entirety as well as in thread order. > >The first post was your announcement >The first reply (second post) was from Stephen John Smoogen, who asked: > >"For those of us who have neither?" Yeah. Because this statement doesn't give the tone of overt hostility at all.....*eyeroll* > >The second reply (third post) was from Jim Perrin, who stated: > >"Would you consider posting it to the wiki to share with all?" > >Then, your reply to Stephen (fourth post): > >"Then there's no reason for you to fricken reply, is there?" > >The your reply to Jim (fifth post): > >"I actually had a thread I started in the forums about it, however, I >stopped monitoring the thread due to people accused me of being an >e-mail address harvester." > >And, the root of all evil, Karanbir's reply (sixth post): > >"and who are you ? >and what / where is your firewall doc ? > >- KB" > >And, we can conclude that you read Stephen's and Jim's posts before replying >to >Karanbir because you reference them in your reply to him (seventh post): > >"So far, two of the three replies, yours being one of them, have left me >with the impression that everyone in the CentOS community is the same as >the jerks in the forum were. I try to do something to contribute to the >community and I just get nothing but negativism." > >So, chronology and thread index favors the fact that you were the one who >replied inappropriately and began the flame war. > >Ian >_______________________________________________ >CentOS mailing list >CentOS(a)centos.org >http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

3 2

Re: [CentOS] Centos Based Fierwall Document
by Ian Kaufman 04 Aug '06

04 Aug '06

Frank, The glory of Google's gmail has allowed me to view this entire thread in it's entirety as well as in thread order. The first post was your announcement The first reply (second post) was from Stephen John Smoogen, who asked: "For those of us who have neither?" The second reply (third post) was from Jim Perrin, who stated: "Would you consider posting it to the wiki to share with all?" Then, your reply to Stephen (fourth post): "Then there's no reason for you to fricken reply, is there?" The your reply to Jim (fifth post): "I actually had a thread I started in the forums about it, however, I stopped monitoring the thread due to people accused me of being an e-mail address harvester." And, the root of all evil, Karanbir's reply (sixth post): "and who are you ? and what / where is your firewall doc ? - KB" And, we can conclude that you read Stephen's and Jim's posts before replying to Karanbir because you reference them in your reply to him (seventh post): "So far, two of the three replies, yours being one of them, have left me with the impression that everyone in the CentOS community is the same as the jerks in the forum were. I try to do something to contribute to the community and I just get nothing but negativism." So, chronology and thread index favors the fact that you were the one who replied inappropriately and began the flame war. Ian

1 0

RE: Re: Re: RE: Re: [CentOS] CentOS Based Fierwall Document
by pctech＠mybellybutton.com 04 Aug '06

04 Aug '06

>On Fri, Aug 04, 2006 at 11:22:48AM -0400, pctech(a)mybellybutton.com wrote: >> >That's because it's widely known and easily available. No one knew you >> >needed help with this until you mentioned it. At that point, all sorts of >> >suggestions for help came up, but you've so far chose to ignore then. >> It ISN'T widely known. I've been one of the "lurkers" on this list, and >> until about a month ago visited the site regularly. Never ocne did I know >> that there was a wiki that I could have used to post the document to. In >> fact, I didn't know until someone was kind enough to point it out >> off-list, I might add. > >It is *widely* know that there are many, many places on the internet where >you can publish helpful information for free. Even if you didn't know about >CentOS-specific resources, you had but to ask. > And all someone had to do was POLITELY say, "Hey. We have this resource available." ONE person did that, and they did it off-list before the "flaming" started. Once the "flaming" started it was a lost cause. > >-- >Matthew Miller mattdm(a)mattdm.org <http://mattdm.org/> >Boston University Linux ------> <http://linux.bu.edu/> >_______________________________________________ >CentOS mailing list >CentOS(a)centos.org >http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

1 0

RE: Re: RE: Re: Re: [CentOS] CentOS Based Fierwall Document
by pctech＠mybellybutton.com 04 Aug '06

04 Aug '06

>On Fri, Aug 04, 2006 at 11:17:23AM -0400, pctech(a)mybellybutton.com wrote: >> Maybe I did overreact. And the onus is on me for that. However, he >> shouldn't have fricken posted if he didn't care. I apologize to the group, > >I can't speak for Stephen, but I assume he "fricken" posted because he was >interested and wanted to know more. So he asked for more info. And woah did >he not get what he asked for. > The first person that replied to my e-mail is the person that set the tone for my exchanges. Right or wrong there it is there. > >-- >Matthew Miller mattdm(a)mattdm.org <http://mattdm.org/> >Boston University Linux ------> <http://linux.bu.edu/> >_______________________________________________ >CentOS mailing list >CentOS(a)centos.org >http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

1 0

RE: Re: [CentOS] CentOS Based Fierwall Document
by pctech＠mybellybutton.com 04 Aug '06

04 Aug '06

>pctech(a)mybellybutton.com wrote: >> No. I blame the people specifically. And since the vast majority of >> the people that have responded, both here and in the threads, >> respinded with overt hostitility, it sets the tone for the way the >> community appears. Right or wrong. That's what it does. If you >> walked into a crowd of strangers and several of them reacted to you >> with overt hostility, you'd think, "Jeeze. What a bunch of d*cks." > >So you walk into a crowd of strangers, start shouting abuse at them and >wonder why people react the way they do? > I "shouted abuse" AFTER I felt that I was being abused. >Furffu. > >Ralph >-- >Ralph Angenendt......ra(a)br-online.de | .."Text processing has made it >possible >Bayerischer Rundfunk...80300 München | ....to right-justify any idea, even >one >Programmbereich.Bayern 3, Jugend und | .which cannot be justified on any >other >Multimedia.........Tl:089.5900.16023 | ..........grounds." -- J. Finnegan, >USC > >_______________________________________________ >CentOS mailing list >CentOS(a)centos.org >http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

2 1

RE: Re: RE: Re: [CentOS] CentOS Based Fierwall Document
by pctech＠mybellybutton.com 04 Aug '06

04 Aug '06

>On Fri, Aug 04, 2006 at 10:51:37AM -0400, pctech(a)mybellybutton.com wrote: >> So, seeing as how I am not some rich corporation that can afford stupid >> amounts of bandwidth exactly HOW am I supposed to distribute it any other >> way? Nobody gave ANY information in this regard until I had been properly >> flamed first. > >That's because it's widely known and easily available. No one knew you >needed help with this until you mentioned it. At that point, all sorts of >suggestions for help came up, but you've so far chose to ignore then. > It ISN'T widely known. I've been one of the "lurkers" on this list, and until about a month ago visited the site regularly. Never ocne did I know that there was a wiki that I could have used to post the document to. In fact, I didn't know until someone was kind enough to point it out off-list, I might add. >> This is the FIRST time anyone has taken offense at my manner of transport >> for my document. > >Your earlier message contradicts this. Remember, *we can check*! > >In *this* thread, people weren't offended by your method of transport -- >just perplexed. > >> >You really do seem to have an atiitude problem, and have already taken up >> >far too much of the bandwidth on this - usually helpful and good mannered >> >- list. >> THAT is why I posted to the list. Because I *THOUGHT* that it was usually >> helpful and good mannered. Apparently there's some secret handshake >> involved in getting a HELPFUL and GOOD MANNERED response that I am unaware >> of. Because I got neither until after I'd been flamed. > >Well, you should maybe step back and consider what the unique factor is in >this case. > Well, considering that this isn't the first time that I have distributed documents in this manner. The only unique factor is my audience. > >-- >Matthew Miller mattdm(a)mattdm.org <http://mattdm.org/> >Boston University Linux ------> <http://linux.bu.edu/> >_______________________________________________ >CentOS mailing list >CentOS(a)centos.org >http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

2 1

RE: Re: [CentOS] CentOS Based Fierwall Document
by pctech＠mybellybutton.com 04 Aug '06

04 Aug '06

>pctech(a)mybellybutton.com wrote: >> THAT is why I posted to the list. Because I *THOUGHT* that it was >> usually helpful and good mannered. Apparently there's some secret >> handshake involved in getting a HELPFUL and GOOD MANNERED response >> that I am unaware of. Because I got neither until after I'd been >> flamed. > >Stop telling lies. The *second* answer to your mail was an offer to host >it on wiki.centos.org. The *first* answer to your mail wasn't a flame. > Believe as you will. The FIRST reply to my first e-mail to the list was NOT a location to post my document. >You might like to prove otherwise. > >Ralph >-- >Ralph Angenendt......ra(a)br-online.de | .."Text processing has made it >possible >Bayerischer Rundfunk...80300 München | ....to right-justify any idea, even >one >Programmbereich.Bayern 3, Jugend und | .which cannot be justified on any >other >Multimedia.........Tl:089.5900.16023 | ..........grounds." -- J. Finnegan, >USC > >_______________________________________________ >CentOS mailing list >CentOS(a)centos.org >http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

2 1

RE: RE: Re: [CentOS] CentOS Based Fierwall Document
by pctech＠mybellybutton.com 04 Aug '06

04 Aug '06

>On Fri, 4 Aug 2006, pctech(a)mybellybutton.com wrote: > >> >On Fri, 4 Aug 2006, Frank Tanner III wrote: >> > >> >> On Fri, 2006-08-04 at 13:15 +0200, Dag Wieers wrote: >> >> > On Thu, 3 Aug 2006, Frank Tanner III wrote: >> >> > >> >> > > It's no wonder that computer novices want nothing to do with Linux. >> >> > >> >> > Maybe Linux wants nothing to do with obnoxious people ? >> >> > >> >> > PS How you communicate influences how you are being perceived, and how >you >> > >> >> > are being perceived incluences how people respond. But if you want to >> >> > believe everybody who uses CentOS dislikes you, go ahead, nobody is >> >> > stopping you. >> >> > >> >> > Unless you want to believe they are. That's fine too. :) >> >> >> >> It's a well known "fact" amongst the general public that the Linux >> >> "evangelists" are a rude flaming bunch. There are hundreds of news >> >> articles stating such. An THIS is what the public in general bases >> >> their attitudes with regards to the community as a whole on. >> >> >> >> I communicated clearly and concisely. I didn't say ONE negative thing >> >> until I got jumped on; or didn't you actually read the thread. >> > >> >I agree your initial mail did not say ONE negative thing. But it was not >> >exactly clear and concise. It failed to reveal any information except >> >that you wrote a firewall document. >> >> Incorrect. It said, "For those of you that have my firewall document." >> So its target audience was very clear and concice. In fact, that was >> the first statement. > >Ok. So because of that line nobody else could ask a question ? Or get >flamed by _you_ otherwise. Why are you being so tense ? Your reaction >caused this whole thread. (Not the initial mail, not Karanbir's answer) > It has nothing to do with nobody else asking a question. It has to do with the WAY it was asked and WHAT was asked. His question came across like, "You and your document don't f*cking matter because we have no idea who you are. You're not welcome here." Right or wrong, that's the way he came across. In fact, more than one person came across that way. > >> >What's more you send it to a list where the majority did not know you, nor > >> >your document. That's ok though, nobody is blaming you for that either. IF > >> >you think that was a worthwhile thing to do, that's your choice. >> > >> >But as soon as people ask you what the document is abouwhich is the >> >logical next step if you send a mail to a list that is uninformed), or >> >a location where you could put it, you started flaming people as if they >> >wanted to correct you. As if you had to defend yourself. >> >> No. They DIDN'T ask me what my document was about. That asked me who >> I was and why they should care. There is a HUGE difference. They >> treated me like I didn't have the RIGHT to speak on the list. > >That was one person, apparently you have succeeded to annoy many more >people (including me). I was not involved in that. > >What's more, you seem to blame the whole community for what this one >person has done to you ! How awfull ! I guess they should make it up to >you now, right ? > No. I blame the people specifically. And since the vast majority of the people that have responded, both here and in the threads, respinded with overt hostitility, it sets the tone for the way the community appears. Right or wrong. That's what it does. If you walked into a crowd of strangers and several of them reacted to you with overt hostility, you'd think, "Jeeze. What a bunch of d*cks." > >> I know you by reputation. You are a fantastic package maintainer. How >> would YOU ahve felt when you first started maintaining packages for the >> various Linux flavors if every time you tried to introduce what you'd >> been doing you got flamed down? Because that's EXACTLY what has >> happened to me. You'd have said, "Piss on it. These guys are nothing >> but jerks that don't seem to be interested in what I say or what I have >> to offer. They just want the opportunity to insult people who invade >> their little 'clique'." > >Karanbir is respected for his work in the CentOS community even more than >I am. He's part of the CentOS team and similar to me, he has a huge >repository of add-on packages. > >Nobody is a jerk. Nobody has flamed you. Nobody insulted you. And even if >they did, there's no reason to insult back or cry fault or exagerate about >things. > I haven't exaggerated about a thing. I stated the way the community made me feel when I offered something up. Nothing more, nothing less. I was left with the perception that everyone was a bunch of rude jerks. Right or wrong, that's the perception that came across. > >> Granted, I haven't been using Linux since before kernel 1.0, like, >> apparently, everyone else on the list has, but that doesn't mean that I >> don't have any useful input. > >You're making things up. Nobody is proclaiming that let alone that >_everyone_ is proclaiming it. Remember that the people that answered your >mail are just a tiny fraction of the complete mailinglist users. Even if >one is flaming you, why should you care ? Give an intelligent answer back, >or spare your breath. > >Afaics you have been the aggressor and you've been insulting since (ven >in the replies to me). There's no point in insulting people unless you >want to be flamed in return. > >But as I said before, you do not have to believe me. You don't have to be >subscribed. The moment you stop answering people in this thread, people >will leave this thread as well. > >Now, let's try to respond to people in this thread without insulting >anyone or bringing this issue up again. Maybe post an index of the topics >from your document. Or convert it to HTML so people can offer feedback or >criticism. Try to divert the subject to something useful. > > >Kind regards, >-- dag wieers, dag(a)wieers.com, http://dag.wieers.com/ -- >[all I want is a warm bed and a kind word and unlimited power] >_______________________________________________ >CentOS mailing list >CentOS(a)centos.org >http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

3 2

RE: Re: [CentOS] CentOS Based Fierwall Document
by pctech＠mybellybutton.com 04 Aug '06

04 Aug '06

>On Fri, 2006-08-04 at 06:09 -0700, Frank Tanner III wrote: >> There goes YOUR attitude again. I *SPECIFICALLY* stated in my initial >> e-mail "or those of you that either have an older revision of my >> firewall document, or are otherwise keeping track of it, there is a new >> version available.". > >That doesn't work in open communities. If you don't provide a link to >the document, such message is useless for the hundreds of active and >passive subscribers to this list. It is important to keep to keep that >in mind when sending a message to such a large list. > >Besides that it often seems better to me to kindly accept critique, than >to attack others (who have contributed an immense amount of work for the >community) on their attitudes. It only creates anger. > >-- Daniel > He didn't ask for a link. He asked who I was and why should he care. >_______________________________________________ >CentOS mailing list >CentOS(a)centos.org >http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

4 3

RE: Re: [CentOS] CentOS Based Fierwall Document
by pctech＠mybellybutton.com 04 Aug '06

04 Aug '06

>pctech(a)mybellybutton.com wrote: >> >> Etiquette? What etiquette? The FIRST comment out of anyone's "mouth" >> was "piss off". Where's the etequitte in that? > >That's really astonishing. I must have missed that mail, though I don't >really filter mails. Who said that and where? > Piss off was in quotes because it was a paraphrase of the way the first response anyone made from the list came across. >> Well then prove me wrong? Because that's all I've gotten at every >> turn was nothing but flames. I tried to be helpful and offer >> something to the community that I, obviously mistakenly, though muight >> be useful and got a hearty "f*ck you" for my efforts. Where's the >> "community spirit" in that? > >Oh right. Nobody offered you to host that document on wiki.centos.org. I >must have dreamt that then. That e-mail came FAR after people had already started flaming me. > >The first offensive mail came from you: > >| On Thu, 2006-08-03 at 15:18 -0600, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: >| > On 8/3/06, pctech at mybellybutton.com <pctech at mybellybutton.com> >| > wrote: >| >> For those of you that either have an older revision of my firewall >| >> document, or are otherwise keeping track of it, there is a new >| >> version available. The current version of the document is version >| >> 3.1. It's changed rather significantly in some areas. >| > >| > For those of us who have neither? >| >| Then there's no reason for you to fricken reply, is there? > >The second mail was an offer to you to host the document on >wiki.centos.org by Jim Perrin. Which you responded to somewhat >strangely. > >The third Mail was Karanbir Singh asking you: > >| and who are you ? >| and what / where is your firewall doc ? > >Which is *short* and maybe misunderstandable, but not offensive at all. >It was a question towards you because that was your first mail on the >list (AFAICS) and noone on this list knew this document. > >Your answer to that was: > >| So far, two of the three replies, yours being one of them, have left me >| with the impression that everyone in the CentOS community is the same as >| the jerks in the forum were. > >So: Second offensive mail also came from you. > >You really *do* seem to have a perception problem. > >Ralph >-- >Ralph Angenendt......ra(a)br-online.de | .."Text processing has made it >possible >Bayerischer Rundfunk...80300 München | ....to right-justify any idea, even >one >Programmbereich.Bayern 3, Jugend und | .which cannot be justified on any >other >Multimedia.........Tl:089.5900.16023 | ..........grounds." -- J. Finnegan, >USC > >_______________________________________________ >CentOS mailing list >CentOS(a)centos.org >http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

4 3

RE: Re: Re: Re: [CentOS] CentOS Based Fierwall Document
by pctech＠mybellybutton.com 04 Aug '06

04 Aug '06

>On 8/4/06, pctech(a)mybellybutton.com <pctech(a)mybellybutton.com> wrote: >> >On 8/4/06, pctech(a)mybellybutton.com <pctech(a)mybellybutton.com> wrote: >> >> He didn't ask for a link. He asked who I was and why should he care. >> > >> >No he didn't, he said: >> > >> >"and who are you ? >> >and what / where is your firewall doc ?" >> > >> >and this was after you said: >> > >> >"Then there's no reason for you to fricken reply, is there?" >> > >> >First angry words were yours. Please development some people skills, >> >or at least reflect before posting. Actually don't bother, this is >> >really entertaining and has made my Friday. >> > >> >> Wrong...His FIRST e-mail said, "Who are you and why should we care?" and >THAT is when I responded the way I did. >> > >Really, could you show where this was? Because looking at the archives >(http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/2006-August/067802.html) and >through my mail >what I see is: > >1. your original post >2. request for more information This is EXACTLY where he says, "Who are you and why should we care. Those were his exact words." What he SHOULD have said was, "Who are you and what document." *IF* he felt the need to reply at all. >3. your response of "Then there's no reason for you to fricken reply, is >there?" >4. request for you to post your doc to the wiki >5. you say you had it on forums but stopped monitoring because >(shock!) people upset you. >6. a further request to put it on the wiki >7. Karnabir saying: > and who are you ? > and what / where is your firewall doc ? >8. you start whining > >Cian >_______________________________________________ >CentOS mailing list >CentOS(a)centos.org >http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

3 2

RE: RE: Re: [CentOS] CentOS Based Fierwall Document
by pctech＠mybellybutton.com 04 Aug '06

04 Aug '06

> > >uklinux.net - >The ISP of choice for the discerning Linux user. > >On Fri, 4 Aug 2006, pctech(a)mybellybutton.com wrote: > >>> Frank Tanner III wrote: >>> >>>> There goes YOUR attitude again. I *SPECIFICALLY* stated in my initial >>>> e-mail "or those of you that either have an older revision of my >>>> firewall document, or are otherwise keeping track of it, there is a new >>>> version available.". >>> >>> if you want your own private mailing list, go start one. bye bye! If you >>> are going to post something here, making it meaningful to people who >>> read the list - is a good thing, and expected from all posters. >>> >> >> It *WAS* meaningful. For the people that it was applicable to. Then >> people decided that because it wasn't applicable to them that they >> should flame me. > >It was not relevant to the majority of the people on this list. I read it >and thought 'huh - weird , has it been misposted ??, have I missed part >of it ??, is it a strange new kind of spam ??, but I didnt find it >important enough to comment. > >It certainly wasnt applicable to me , but more to the point I didnt know >why it had been posted to this list and to what it referred. > >Were the people who it was relevant to then meant to ask you for a fresh >copy to be sent to them ??? > >This really is not the way that opensource documents are usually distributed - So, seeing as how I am not some rich corporation that can afford stupid amounts of bandwidth exactly HOW am I supposed to distribute it any other way? Nobody gave ANY information in this regard until I had been properly flamed first. This is not the first document that I have distributed in this manner. I've distributed a couple on the DNS and BIND list in this manner. I have distributed a couple on the old Red Hat lists in this manner. This is the FIRST time anyone has taken offense at my manner of transport for my document. > >opensource works by peole being able to take what they need, not request a >copy ... > >Or if there was some hidden place that the knowing could download it from >- again - neither the spirit nor method of open source. > >> It's attitudes such as this as to why people say, "You can never get good >support with Open Source software." > >They are more likely to say that if they cant get hold of it in the first >place ... > >> I came onto the list trying to be HJELPFUL, and got burnt to the ground >instead. JUST like in the forums. I guess they'er right. No good deed goes >unpunished. >> >> Now I understand why nobody has offered a document like this to the >> community before. It certainly makes me want to keep all of my future >> documents to myself. They're OBVIOUSLY only a bother to everyone and >> nobody wants them. >> > >You really do seem to have an atiitude problem, and have already taken up >far too much of the bandwidth on this - usually helpful and good mannered >- list. THAT is why I posted to the list. Because I *THOUGHT* that it was usually helpful and good mannered. Apparently there's some secret handshake involved in getting a HELPFUL and GOOD MANNERED response that I am unaware of. Because I got neither until after I'd been flamed. > >You are likely to put peoples backs up by such comments - people dnt know >how great your work is unless they can access it .... > >Why dont you start again - I suggest with something like :- > >' >For those that know about it, I have released a new version of my firewall >document - for those that dont - I have written a document which I would like >to commend to the >open source community as I feel that it is well writen and informative. > >I would like somewhere to host it if anyone has any suggestions, as I cant >provide unlimited bandwidth. > >If anyone would like a copy to check out then please mail me offlist' > >Or some such ... > >There are numerous places where such a document could be hosted with >provided bandwidth , sourceforge and google being two of them , CentOS >also being a possiblity ... > >But having not seen it we dont know if it is relevant or useful .... > >If you wish us to take a look at it then please either email a copy to me >or place it somwehere that it can be accessed. > >Regards > > >Lance Davis >CentOS Project Leader > > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ >CentOS mailing list >CentOS(a)centos.org >http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

3 2

RE: Re: [CentOS] CentOS Based Fierwall Document
by pctech＠mybellybutton.com 04 Aug '06

04 Aug '06

>On Fri, 4 Aug 2006, Frank Tanner III wrote: > >> On Fri, 2006-08-04 at 13:15 +0200, Dag Wieers wrote: >> > On Thu, 3 Aug 2006, Frank Tanner III wrote: >> > >> > > It's no wonder that computer novices want nothing to do with Linux. >> > >> > Maybe Linux wants nothing to do with obnoxious people ? >> > >> > PS How you communicate influences how you are being perceived, and how you > >> > are being perceived incluences how people respond. But if you want to >> > believe everybody who uses CentOS dislikes you, go ahead, nobody is >> > stopping you. >> > >> > Unless you want to believe they are. That's fine too. :) >> >> It's a well known "fact" amongst the general public that the Linux >> "evangelists" are a rude flaming bunch. There are hundreds of news >> articles stating such. An THIS is what the public in general bases >> their attitudes with regards to the community as a whole on. >> >> I communicated clearly and concisely. I didn't say ONE negative thing >> until I got jumped on; or didn't you actually read the thread. > >I agree your initial mail did not say ONE negative thing. But it was not >exactly clear and concise. It failed to reveal any information except >that you wrote a firewall document. > Incorrect. It said, "For those of you that have my firewall document." So its target audience was very clear and concice. In fact, that was the first statement. >What's more you send it to a list where the majority did not know you, nor >your document. That's ok though, nobody is blaming you for that either. IF >you think that was a worthwhile thing to do, that's your choice. > >But as soon as people ask you what the document is abouwhich is the >logical next step if you send a mail to a list that is uninformed), or >a location where you could put it, you started flaming people as if they >wanted to correct you. As if you had to defend yourself. > No. They DIDN'T ask me what my document was about. That asked me who I was and why they should care. There is a HUGE difference. They treated me like I didn't have the RIGHT to speak on the list. I know you by reputation. You are a fantastic package maintainer. How would YOU ahve felt when you first started maintaining packages for the various Linux flavors if every time you tried to introduce what you'd been doing you got flamed down? Because that's EXACTLY what has happened to me. You'd have said, "Piss on it. These guys are nothing but jerks that don't seem to be interested in what I say or what I have to offer. They just want the opportunity to insult people who invade their little 'clique'." Granted, I haven't been using Linux since before kernel 1.0, like, apparently, everyone else on the list has, but that doesn't mean that I don't have any useful input. >And I think that is exactly what enflamed the whole situation. > >Now that is of course my description of what happened, but I guess I'm not >objective as I have been jumping on you as all these other "evangelists" >on this list. In fact, I really think they are out to get you. Run, >Forest, Run ! > >Kind regards, >-- dag wieers, dag(a)wieers.com, http://dag.wieers.com/ -- >[all I want is a warm bed and a kind word and unlimited power] >_______________________________________________ >CentOS mailing list >CentOS(a)centos.org >http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

3 2

RE: Re: Re: [CentOS] CentOS Based Fierwall Document
by pctech＠mybellybutton.com 04 Aug '06

04 Aug '06

>On 8/4/06, pctech(a)mybellybutton.com <pctech(a)mybellybutton.com> wrote: >> He didn't ask for a link. He asked who I was and why should he care. > >No he didn't, he said: > >"and who are you ? >and what / where is your firewall doc ?" > >and this was after you said: > >"Then there's no reason for you to fricken reply, is there?" > >First angry words were yours. Please development some people skills, >or at least reflect before posting. Actually don't bother, this is >really entertaining and has made my Friday. > Wrong...His FIRST e-mail said, "Who are you and why should we care?" and THAT is when I responded the way I did. >Cian > > >> >_______________________________________________ >> >CentOS mailing list >> >CentOS(a)centos.org >> >http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos >> _______________________________________________ >> CentOS mailing list >> CentOS(a)centos.org >> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos >> >_______________________________________________ >CentOS mailing list >CentOS(a)centos.org >http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

3 2

RE: Re: [CentOS] CentOS Based Fierwall Document
by pctech＠mybellybutton.com 04 Aug '06

04 Aug '06

>On Fri, 2006-08-04 at 06:12 -0700, Frank Tanner III wrote: >> It's a well known "fact" amongst the general public that the Linux >> "evangelists" are a rude flaming bunch. There are hundreds of news >> articles stating such. An THIS is what the public in general bases >> their attitudes with regards to the community as a whole on. > >You have to keep in mind that support from lists like this one are >voluntary in nature. So, it only seems decent to try to get the >etiquette of the list, and (although it does not apply here) research a >problem before posting questions to the list. > Etiquette? What etiquette? The FIRST comment out of anyone's "mouth" was "piss off". Where's the etequitte in that? >IMHO calling Linux community members a "rude flaming bunch" is highly >inappropriate. The community built a free operating system, and provides >free support. If people need hand holding or extensive support they can >get a support contract from a prominent North-American Linux vendor, or >one of the other venues that provides Linux support. > Well then prove me wrong? Because that's all I've gotten at every turn was nothing but flames. I tried to be helpful and offer something to the community that I, obviously mistakenly, though muight be useful and got a hearty "f*ck you" for my efforts. Where's the "community spirit" in that? >-- Daniel > >_______________________________________________ >CentOS mailing list >CentOS(a)centos.org >http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

2 1

Openvpn problem not able to access the other machines on remote subnet
by ankush grover 04 Aug '06

04 Aug '06

hey friends, I have installed OpenVPN 2.0.7 (i386-redhat-linux-gnu [SSL] [LZO] [EPOLL] built on Apr 29 2006) on Centos4.0 through rpm (diag repository). The network scenario of my office is below Remote Client ----> Internet <-------> Cisco Pix Firewall (Gateway) <----> VPN Server & LAN Clients (192.168.5.0/24) Cisco Pix Firewall: Having a static public ip address and a LAN Address of 192.168.5.5 and it is also acting as gateway for the LAN VPN Server: 192.168.5.20 and this is also a server on LAN running few more services for the clients in LAN. LAN Clients: 192.168.5.0/24 VPN Server port that is 1194 is open on Firewall. This is a test scenario and I was able to connect to the VPN Server from my home machine but I was not able to browse the clients or servers in the network range of 192.168.5.0/24. Routing table on the client machine. The client machine is having static ipaddress of 172.19.112.154( dsl connection) 10.1.1.5 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0 tun0 192.168.5.0 10.1.1.5 255.255.255.0 UG 0 0 0 tun0 10.1.1.0 10.1.1.5 255.255.255.0 UG 0 0 0 tun0 172.19.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.0.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 169.254.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.0.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 127.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 U 0 0 0 lo 0.0.0.0 172.19.0.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0 Tue Aug 1 23:10:55 2006 SIGUSR1[soft,tls-error] received, process restarting Tue Aug 1 23:10:55 2006 Restart pause, 2 second(s) Tue Aug 1 23:10:57 2006 IMPORTANT: OpenVPN's default port number is now 1194, based on an official port number assignment by IANA. OpenVPN 2.0-beta16 and earlier used 5000 as the default port. Tue Aug 1 23:10:57 2006 Re-using SSL/TLS context Tue Aug 1 23:10:57 2006 LZO compression initialized Tue Aug 1 23:10:57 2006 Control Channel MTU parms [ L:1542 D:166 EF:66 EB:0 ET:0 EL:0 ] Tue Aug 1 23:10:57 2006 Data Channel MTU parms [ L:1542 D:1450 EF:42 EB:135 ET:0 EL:0 AF:3/1 ] Tue Aug 1 23:10:57 2006 Local Options hash (VER=V4): '504e774e' Tue Aug 1 23:10:57 2006 Expected Remote Options hash (VER=V4): '14168603' Tue Aug 1 23:10:57 2006 UDPv4 link local: [undef] Tue Aug 1 23:10:57 2006 UDPv4 link remote: xx.xx.xx.xx:1194 --->> public ip address on pix firewall Tue Aug 1 23:11:21 2006 TLS: Initial packet from xx.xx.xx.xx:1194, ---->> public ip address on pix firewall sid=7c6f6585 62ec6b5f Tue Aug 1 23:11:21 2006 VERIFY OK: depth=1, /C=IN/ST=DE/L=ND/O=OpenVPN-TEST/OU=VPN_Server/CN= server1.test.net/emailAddress=postmater@localhost.localdomain Tue Aug 1 23:11:21 2006 VERIFY OK: nsCertType=SERVER Tue Aug 1 23:11:21 2006 VERIFY OK: depth=0, /C=IN/ST=DE/O=OpenVPN-TEST/OU=VPN_Server/CN=server1.test.net/emailAddress=postmater(a)localhost.localdomain Tue Aug 1 23:11:23 2006 Data Channel Encrypt: Cipher 'BF-CBC' initialized with 128 bit key Tue Aug 1 23:11:23 2006 Data Channel Encrypt: Using 160 bit message hash 'SHA1' for HMAC authentication Tue Aug 1 23:11:23 2006 Data Channel Decrypt: Cipher 'BF-CBC' initialized with 128 bit key Tue Aug 1 23:11:23 2006 Data Channel Decrypt: Using 160 bit message hash 'SHA1' for HMAC authentication Tue Aug 1 23:11:23 2006 Control Channel: TLSv1, cipher TLSv1/SSLv3 DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA, 1024 bit RSA Tue Aug 1 23:11:23 2006 [server1.test.net] Peer Connection Initiated with xx.xx.xx.xx:1194 Tue Aug 1 23:11:25 2006 SENT CONTROL [server1.test.net ]: 'PUSH_REQUEST' (status=1) Tue Aug 1 23:11:25 2006 PUSH: Received control message: 'PUSH_REPLY,route 192.168.5.0 255.255.255.0,dhcp-option DNS 192.168.5.10,route 10.1.1.0 255.255.255.0,ping 10,ping-restart 120,ifconfig 10.1.1.6 10.1.1.5' Tue Aug 1 23:11:25 2006 OPTIONS IMPORT: timers and/or timeouts modified Tue Aug 1 23:11:25 2006 OPTIONS IMPORT: --ifconfig/up options modified Tue Aug 1 23:11:25 2006 OPTIONS IMPORT: route options modified Tue Aug 1 23:11:25 2006 OPTIONS IMPORT: --ip-win32 and/or --dhcp-option options modified Tue Aug 1 23:11:25 2006 TUN/TAP device tun0 opened Tue Aug 1 23:11:25 2006 /sbin/ip link set dev tun0 up mtu 1500 Tue Aug 1 23:11:25 2006 /sbin/ip addr add dev tun0 local 10.1.1.6 peer 10.1.1.5 Tue Aug 1 23:11:25 2006 /sbin/ip route add 192.168.5.0/24 via 10.1.1.5 Tue Aug 1 23:11:25 2006 /sbin/ip route add 10.1.1.0/24 via 10.1.1.5 Tue Aug 1 23:11:25 2006 Initialization Sequence Completed ifconfig on server tun0 Link encap:UNSPEC HWaddr 00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00 inet addr:10.1.1.1 P-t-P:10.1.1.2 Mask:255.255.255.255 UP POINTOPOINT RUNNING NOARP MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:173 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:145 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:100 RX bytes:14052 (13.7 KiB) TX bytes:12192 ( 11.9 KiB) ifconfig on client tun0 Link encap:Point-to-Point Protocol inet addr:10.1.1.6 P-t-P:10.1.1.5 Mask: 255.255.255.255 UP POINTOPOINT RUNNING NOARP MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:143 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:174 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:100 RX bytes:12024 (11.7 Kb) TX bytes:14112 (13.7 Kb) Tue Aug 1 23:01:10 2006 202.149.50.30:1030 Data Channel Decrypt: Cipher 'BF-CBC' initialized with 128 bit key Tue Aug 1 23:01:10 2006 202.149.50.30:1030 Data Channel Decrypt: Using 160 bit message hash 'SHA1' for HMAC authentication Tue Aug 1 23:01:10 2006 202.149.50.30:1030 Control Channel: TLSv1, cipher TLSv1/SSLv3 DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA, 1024 bit RSA Tue Aug 1 23:01:10 2006 202.149.50.30:1030 [clien1.test.net ] Peer Connection Initiated with 202.149.50.30:1030 Tue Aug 1 23:01:10 2006 clien1.test.net/202.149.50.30:1030 MULTI: Learn: 10.1.1.6 -> clien1.test.net/202.149.50.30:1030 Tue Aug 1 23:01:10 2006 clien1.test.net/202.149.50.30:1030 MULTI: primary virtual IP for clien1.test.net/202.149.50.30:1030: 10.1.1.6 Tue Aug 1 23:01:11 2006 clien1.test.net/202.149.50.30:1030 PUSH: Received control message: 'PUSH_REQUEST' Tue Aug 1 23:01:11 2006 clien1.test.net/202.149.50.30:1030 SENT CONTROL [ clien1.test.net] 'PUSH_REPLY,route 192.168.5.0 255.255.255.0,dhcp-option DNS 192.168.5.10,route 10.1.1.0 255.255.255.0,ping 10,ping-restart 120,ifconfig 10.1.1.6 10.1.1.5' (status=1) Tue Aug 1 23:34:41 2006 clien1.test.net/202.149.50.30:1030 [clien1.test.net] Inactivity timeout (--ping-restart), restarting Tue Aug 1 23:34:41 2006 clien1.test.net/202.149.50.30:1030 SIGUSR1[soft,ping-restart] received, client-instance restarting iptables -L on VPN Server Chain INPUT (policy ACCEPT) target prot opt source destination ACCEPT all -- 10.1.1.0/24 192.168.5.0/24 One setting is missing in client.conf that is "route 192.168.5.0 255.255.255.0" These entries are also added to iptables on VPN Server # Allow TUN interface connections to OpenVPN server iptables -A INPUT -i tun+ -j ACCEPT # Allow TUN interface connections to be forwarded through other interfaces iptables -A FORWARD -i tun+ -j ACCEPT # Allow TAP interface connections to OpenVPN server iptables -A INPUT -i tap+ -j ACCEPT # Allow TAP interface connections to be forwarded through other interfaces iptables -A FORWARD -i tap+ -j ACCEPT IP Forwarding is enable on the VPN Server. But still I am not able to access the machines/clients in subnet 192.168.5.0/24. I am attaching the server.conf(openvpnserver.conf) file with this emai. What more iptables entries needs to be added ? Please let me know if you need any further inputs. Thanks & Regards Ankush Grover

2 4

CentOS-announce Digest, Vol 18, Issue 4
by centos-announce-request＠centos.org 04 Aug '06

04 Aug '06

Send CentOS-announce mailing list submissions to centos-announce(a)centos.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-announce or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to centos-announce-request(a)centos.org You can reach the person managing the list at centos-announce-owner(a)centos.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of CentOS-announce digest..." Today's Topics: 1. CESA-2006:0298 Low CentOS 3 i386 openssh - security update (Tru Huynh) 2. CESA-2006:0298 Low CentOS 3 x86_64 openssh - security update (Tru Huynh) 3. CESA-2006:0368 Low CentOS 3 i386 elfutils - security update (Tru Huynh) 4. CESA-2006:0368 Low CentOS 3 x86_64 elfutils - security update (Tru Huynh) 5. CESA-2006:0437 Important CentOS 3 i386 kernel - security update (Tru Huynh) 6. CESA-2006:0437 Important CentOS 3 x86_64 kernel - security update (Tru Huynh) 7. CESA-2006:0576 Moderate CentOS 3 i386 kdebase - security fix (Tru Huynh) 8. CESA-2006:0576 Moderate CentOS 3 x86_64 kdebase - security fix (Tru Huynh) 9. CESA-2006:0591 Important CentOS 3 i386 samba - security update (Tru Huynh) 10. CESA-2006:0591 Important CentOS 3 x86_64 samba - security update (Tru Huynh) 11. CESA-2006:0604 Moderate CentOS 3 i386 ruby - security update (Tru Huynh) 12. CESA-2006:0604 Moderate CentOS 3 x86_64 ruby - security update (Tru Huynh) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2006 15:58:21 +0200 From: Tru Huynh <tru(a)centos.org> Subject: [CentOS-announce] CESA-2006:0298 Low CentOS 3 i386 openssh - security update To: centos-announce(a)centos.org Message-ID: <20060803135821.GA17314(a)sillage.bis.pasteur.fr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" CentOS Errata and Security Advisory CESA-2006:0298 openssh security update for CentOS 3 i386: https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2006-0298.html The following updated file has been uploaded and is currently syncing to the mirrors: i386: updates/i386/RPMS/openssh-3.6.1p2-33.30.9.i386.rpm updates/i386/RPMS/openssh-askpass-3.6.1p2-33.30.9.i386.rpm updates/i386/RPMS/openssh-askpass-gnome-3.6.1p2-33.30.9.i386.rpm updates/i386/RPMS/openssh-clients-3.6.1p2-33.30.9.i386.rpm updates/i386/RPMS/openssh-server-3.6.1p2-33.30.9.i386.rpm source: updates/SRPMS/openssh-3.6.1p2-33.30.9.src.rpm You may update your CentOS-3 i386 installations by running the command: yum update openssh\* Tru -- Tru Huynh (CentOS-3 i386/x86_64 Package Maintenance) http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xBEFA581B

1 0

Directory tree disk usage utility
by Robert Moskowitz 04 Aug '06

04 Aug '06

Is there some nice program that will display how much disk space is being used by each directory? e.g. 3.9G / 1.6G /etc 3.4K /etc/yum.repo and so forth?

2 2

Bind DNS service
by Nikos Zaharioudakis 04 Aug '06

04 Aug '06

Hi everybody, I have a request from a client that is an planning on a small ISP business. I am looking into a DNS {bind based} solution. Are there any hints or tips concerning hardware requirements? Is there any kind of tool to perform the sizing? Should I have different machines for caching ? Should i compile bind myself for xtra performance. There are going to be some 400K dsl customers and some 50-70K virtual hostings I know that most dns trafic is generated by MX lookups. Any hints are greatly appreciated. -- ########################################3 Zaharioudakis Nikos mob: +30 6947204063 A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?

1 0

Can't get rid of SYN_RECV
by Paul 04 Aug '06

04 Aug '06

OK, Something wacky. I'm getting many, many of these, it just keeps building: --snip-- netstat -vat: tcp 0 0 192.168.103.99:http statusurl.e-gold.com:57015 SYN_RECV tcp 0 0 192.168.103.99:http statusurl.e-gold.com:26377 SYN_RECV tcp 0 0 192.168.103.99:http statusurl.e-gold.com:64279 SYN_RECV tcp 0 0 192.168.103.99:http statusurl.e-gold.com:27807 SYN_RECV tcp 0 0 192.168.103.99:http statusurl.e-gold.com:29095 SYN_RECV tcp 0 0 192.168.103.99:http statusurl.e-gold.com:47009 SYN_RECV tcp 0 0 192.168.103.99:http statusurl.e-gold.com:41369 SYN_RECV tcp 0 0 192.168.103.99:http statusurl.e-gold.com:45120 SYN_RECV tcp 0 0 192.168.103.99:http statusurl.e-gold.com:63145 SYN_RECV tcp 0 0 192.168.103.99:http statusurl.e-gold.com:4027 SYN_RECV tcp 0 0 192.168.103.99:http statusurl.e-gold.com:11361 SYN_RECV tcp 0 0 192.168.103.99:http statusurl.e-gold.com:53867 SYN_RECV tcp 0 0 192.168.103.99:http statusurl.e-gold.com:64779 SYN_RECV tcp 0 0 192.168.103.99:http statusurl.e-gold.com:20063 SYN_RECV tcp 0 0 192.168.103.99:http statusurl.e-gold.com:43209 SYN_RECV tcp 0 0 192.168.103.99:http statusurl.e-gold.com:44629 SYN_RECV tcp 0 0 192.168.103.99:http statusurl.e-gold.com:49010 SYN_RECV tcp 0 0 192.168.103.99:http statusurl.e-gold.com:3974 SYN_RECV tcp 0 0 192.168.103.99:http statusurl.e-gold.com:6822 SYN_RECV tcp 0 0 192.168.103.99:http statusurl.e-gold.com:54650 SYN_RECV tcp 0 0 192.168.103.99:http statusurl.e-gold.com:43689 SYN_RECV tcp 0 0 192.168.103.99:http statusurl.e-gold.com:35714 SYN_RECV tcp 0 0 192.168.103.99:http statusurl.e-gold.com:3381 SYN_RECV tcp 0 0 192.168.103.99:http statusurl.e-gold.com:48516 SYN_RECV tcp 0 0 192.168.103.99:http statusurl.e-gold.com:52141 SYN_RECV tcp 0 0 192.168.103.99:http statusurl.e-gold.com:11431 SYN_RECV tcp 0 0 192.168.103.99:http statusurl.e-gold.com:50562 SYN_RECV tcp 0 0 192.168.103.99:http statusurl.e-gold.com:17152 SYN_RECV tcp 0 0 192.168.103.99:http statusurl.e-gold.com:10535 SYN_RECV tcp 0 0 192.168.103.99:http statusurl.e-gold.com:18219 SYN_RECV tcp 0 0 192.168.103.99:http statusurl.e-gold.com:7582 SYN_RECV tcp 0 0 192.168.103.99:http statusurl.e-gold.com:60773 SYN_RECV tcp 0 0 192.168.103.99:http statusurl.e-gold.com:46995 SYN_RECV tcp 0 0 192.168.103.99:http statusurl.e-gold.com:60185 SYN_RECV tcp 0 0 192.168.103.99:http statusurl.e-gold.com:34357 SYN_RECV tcp 0 0 192.168.103.99:http statusurl.e-gold.com:41346 SYN_RECV tcp 0 0 192.168.103.99:http statusurl.e-gold.com:1135 SYN_RECV tcp 0 0 192.168.103.99:http statusurl.e-gold.com:64816 SYN_RECV tcp 0 0 192.168.103.99:http statusurl.e-gold.com:16062 SYN_RECV tcp 0 0 192.168.103.99:http statusurl.e-gold.com:7499 SYN_RECV tcp 0 0 192.168.103.99:http statusurl.e-gold.com:60087 SYN_RECV tcp 0 0 192.168.103.99:http statusurl.e-gold.com:33579 SYN_RECV tcp 0 0 192.168.103.99:http statusurl.e-gold.com:6757 SYN_RECV tcp 0 0 192.168.103.99:http statusurl.e-gold.com:8912 SYN_RECV tcp 0 0 192.168.103.99:http statusurl.e-gold.com:50510 SYN_RECV tcp 0 0 192.168.103.99:http statusurl.e-gold.com:44317 SYN_RECV tcp 0 0 192.168.103.99:http statusurl.e-gold.com:2149 SYN_RECV tcp 0 0 192.168.103.99:http statusurl.e-gold.com:294 SYN_RECV tcp 0 0 192.168.103.99:http statusurl.e-gold.com:60112 SYN_RECV tcp 0 0 192.168.103.99:http statusurl.e-gold.com:52569 SYN_RECV tcp 0 0 192.168.103.99:http statusurl.e-gold.com:26452 SYN_RECV --snip-- So, seeing this is weird activity, I wanna see if I can put a stop to it. So I added to iptables: -A INPUT -s 209.200.128.0/255.255.192.0 -j DROP -A OUTPUT -o eth0 -p tcp -m tcp -d 209.200.128.0/255.255.192.0 -j DROP I restarted httpd and still get the same thing. WTF??? -- ^^^^^^^^^^^^| || \ | Budvar ######|| ||'|"\,__. | _..._...______ ===|=||_|__|...] "(@)'(@)""""**|(@)(@)*****(@)I -- ^^^^^^^^^^^^| || \ | Budvar ######|| ||'|"\,__. | _..._...______ ===|=||_|__|...] "(@)'(@)""""**|(@)(@)*****(@)I

2 2

RE: [CentOS] RHEL4 to CentOS 4
by tagarsi, arun 04 Aug '06

04 Aug '06

Thanks...that works great.... Arun -----Original Message----- From: centos-bounces(a)centos.org [mailto:centos-bounces@centos.org]On Behalf Of Will McDonald Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 3:16 PM To: CentOS mailing list Subject: Re: [CentOS] RHEL4 to CentOS 4 On 03/08/06, tagarsi, arun <atagarsi(a)cgg.com> wrote: > Hi , > For reasons I will not go in to does anyone know if you can convert a > RedHat RHEL4 box to CentOS 4 ? I am hoping this possible with our re > installing . If it if what do I need to do to get the system to run yum > instead of the RedHat updates. It should be relatively simple but test on non-critical, non-production systems first, obviously. The old instructions (we Kickstart CentOS on all new systems now) I have for switching from Whitebox to CentOS, which should be near as damnit what's needed to switch from RHEL too, were as follows... rpm --import http://mirror.centos.org/centos/RPM-GPG-KEY-CentOS-4 rpm -Uvh http://www.sunsite.org.uk/sites/msync.centos.org/CentOS/4/os/i386/CentOS/RP… \ http://www.sunsite.org.uk/sites/msync.centos.org/CentOS/4/os/i386/CentOS/RP… rpm -Uvh http://www.sunsite.org.uk/sites/msync.centos.org/CentOS/4/os/i386/CentOS/RP… rpm -e yum rpm -Uvh http://www.sunsite.org.uk/sites/msync.centos.org/CentOS/4/os/i386/CentOS/RP… rpm -Uvh http://www.sunsite.org.uk/sites/msync.centos.org/CentOS/4/os/i386/CentOS/RP… \ http://www.sunsite.org.uk/sites/msync.centos.org/CentOS/4/os/i386/CentOS/RP… \ http://www.sunsite.org.uk/sites/msync.centos.org/CentOS/4/os/i386/CentOS/RP… \ http://www.sunsite.org.uk/sites/msync.centos.org/CentOS/4/os/i386/CentOS/RP… \ http://www.sunsite.org.uk/sites/msync.centos.org/CentOS/4/os/i386/CentOS/RP… Add this to /etc/yum.repos.d/CentOS-Base.repo [base] name=CentOS-$releasever - Base baseurl=ftp://archive/centos/$releasever/os/$basearch gpgcheck=1 [update] name=CentOS-$releasever - Updates baseurl=ftp://archive/centos/$releasever/updates/$basearch/ gpgcheck=1 [extras] name=CentOS-$releasever - Extras baseurl=http://archive/centos/$releasever/extras/$basearch/ gpgcheck=1 enabled=0 Add this to /etc/yum.repos.d/Dag.repo [archive-rhel4-dag] name=RHEL4 Linux $releasever - $basearch - DAG baseurl=ftp://archive/dag/el4/ Quick Yum update... yum -y update Where we have "archive" you'd need to replace that with the path to a local mirror. And obviously the URLs for the RPM commands could be changed to somewhere closer with more recent RPMs. But that's an outline of what you'd need. There are additional artwork RPMs etc. if you're bothered about boot time splash screens and the like. Will. _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS(a)centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

3 2

OT: Measure 2U Server Amp Usage
by Karl R. Balsmeier 03 Aug '06

03 Aug '06

Hi, Running a bunch of CentOS servers on 2U supermicro equipment, usually with 8 drives on Adaptec SmartRAID V or LSI Megaraid. In designing a rack in a data center, the question arises as to how to measure the amperage the server uses, prior to investing in power drops that actually do that for you, even remotely, for about $260.00-300USD per unit. This number is the important one these days in determining rack/datacenter design. So the geek question is, "what do you use, from radio shack, or elsewhere, to accomplish this one time measurement *before* you implement a design"? Even deeper, is there an open-source equivalent to some of the software-based solutions that purport to be able to give a reading on amp usage. Just curious if you have a similar server-type, (supermicro=very popular), what your measurements have been. -karlski

4 3

RHEL4 to CentOS 4
by tagarsi, arun 03 Aug '06

03 Aug '06

Hi , For reasons I will not go in to does anyone know if you can convert a RedHat RHEL4 box to CentOS 4 ? I am hoping this possible with our re installing . If it if what do I need to do to get the system to run yum instead of the RedHat updates. Thanks Arun

2 1

EXT3-fs error (devive dm-0) in start_transaction: Journal has aborted
by Alfred von Campe 03 Aug '06

03 Aug '06

My recently installed CentOS 4.3 system (which is the kickstart server for other systems -- see other thread) is currently hung. I can ping it, but can't do much of anything else. When I switch to one of the virtual consoles, I can briefly see the "login:" prompt, but then that window immediately fills with up with the following message: EXT3-fs error (devive dm-0) in start_transaaction: Journal has aborted This is displayed over and over again. I used the default (automatic) partitioning scheme, so the root file system is an ext3 partition on a logical volume that spans most of the disk (everything except for the swap partition and /boot). Anyone else seen this? Any ideas as to what would cause this? I'll be rebooting the system shortly... Alfred

12 35

Re: [CentOS] EXT3-fs error (devive dm-0) in start_transaction: Journal has aborted
by N.Toge 03 Aug '06

03 Aug '06

Hi, Alfred von Campe wrote on Wed, 2 Aug 2006 09:34:06 -0400 > It's time to resurrect this thread from way back in June. I suspect this is more of a HW problem rathan a SW one. About two years ago I had a similar EXT3 fs failure case to develop on a server running Mandrake Linux. My case was due to the fact that this desktop Linux computer had two HDs, where one of them (a Quamtum, top unit on the stack) got overheated because of the heat emitted by the bottom unit (a Maxtor). I tried using a recue CD disk to fix the data errors and limped along for approximately three months. But I but did not manage to pin down the problem till the top HD eventually died and noticed that it was burning hot! So, open the box while it is still running now and feel around to find if something is wrong. - Nobu Toge

1 0

CentOS-announce Digest, Vol 18, Issue 3
by centos-announce-request＠centos.org 03 Aug '06

03 Aug '06

Send CentOS-announce mailing list submissions to centos-announce(a)centos.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-announce or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to centos-announce-request(a)centos.org You can reach the person managing the list at centos-announce-owner(a)centos.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of CentOS-announce digest..." Today's Topics: 1. CESA-2006:0603-01: Important CentOS 2 i386 libtiff security update (John Newbigin) 2. CESA-2006:0615-01: Moderate CentOS 2 i386 gnupg security update (John Newbigin) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2006 13:41:45 +1000 From: John Newbigin <jnewbigin(a)ict.swin.edu.au> Subject: [CentOS-announce] CESA-2006:0603-01: Important CentOS 2 i386 libtiff security update To: centos-announce(a)centos.org Message-ID: <44D17079.8090802(a)ict.swin.edu.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed The following errata for CentOS-2 have been built and uploaded to the centos mirror: RHSA-2006:0603-01 Important: libtiff security update Files available: libtiff-3.5.7-30.el2.4.i386.rpm libtiff-devel-3.5.7-30.el2.4.i386.rpm More details are available from the RedHat web site at https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/rh21as-errata.html The easy way to make sure you are up to date with all the latest patches is to run: # yum update -- John Newbigin Computer Systems Officer Faculty of Information and Communication Technologies Swinburne University of Technology Melbourne, Australia http://www.ict.swin.edu.au/staff/jnewbigin ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2006 13:42:42 +1000 From: John Newbigin <jnewbigin(a)ict.swin.edu.au> Subject: [CentOS-announce] CESA-2006:0615-01: Moderate CentOS 2 i386 gnupg security update To: centos-announce(a)centos.org Message-ID: <44D170B2.3000902(a)ict.swin.edu.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed The following errata for CentOS-2 have been built and uploaded to the centos mirror: RHSA-2006:0615-01 Moderate: gnupg security update Files available: gnupg-1.0.7-18.i386.rpm More details are available from the RedHat web site at https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/rh21as-errata.html The easy way to make sure you are up to date with all the latest patches is to run: # yum update -- John Newbigin Computer Systems Officer Faculty of Information and Communication Technologies Swinburne University of Technology Melbourne, Australia http://www.ict.swin.edu.au/staff/jnewbigin ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ CentOS-announce mailing list CentOS-announce(a)centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-announce End of CentOS-announce Digest, Vol 18, Issue 3 **********************************************

1 0

DNS Server and SQL backend
by Rodrigo Barbosa 03 Aug '06

03 Aug '06

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 I think most people here use BIND as their DNS server of choise. I just happen to have updated DLZ patch for the current bind version. DLZ patch allows you to use mysql (pgsql, ldap etc) as a backend for zone storage. I make no garantees, of course, but if anyone is interested on the patch (with or without the specfile for rpm building), please let me know. To read more about DLZ: http://bind-dlz.sourceforge.net/ Best Regards, - -- Rodrigo Barbosa "Quid quid Latine dictum sit, altum viditur" "Be excellent to each other ..." - Bill & Ted (Wyld Stallyns) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFEyYgfpdyWzQ5b5ckRAkRaAJkBSnYueQ2M/BTOzyxe75tlOyimIQCgj6lD 24AM2vQR/ZWgArzCaocutp8= =jP6a -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

9 23

RE: [CentOS] Open Source NAS/NFS solution
by Mark Schoonover 03 Aug '06

03 Aug '06

Tom Brown wrote: >> I've worked on openfiler for a while, and its quite a decent product >> - the reason why its stayed in RC stage for the openfiler-2 product, >> is because they are sorting out some commercial grade support >> options. If you dont need the commercial support, go with openfiler >> now! > > thanks for your input - seems openfiler may be suitable after all! > > cheers Well, like I said, OpenFiler would freeze up while formatting the drives. So it wouldn't work with my HW, which was brand new and built around 3Ware SATA cards. HTH Mark

2 1

Losing some ticks... checking if CPU frequency changed.
by José Miguel Pérez P. 02 Aug '06

02 Aug '06

i see this message in the dmesg , any one know this problem and the soliontion ??? Losing some ticks... checking if CPU frequency changed. thaks José Pérez

2 1

weird network interface name
by Mark Quitoriano 02 Aug '06

02 Aug '06

Hi list, i have a problem in one of my centos boxes. I installed CentOS 4.3. I addedd additionl interface card in this server and when i execute ifconfig command i see devNNN(where n is a random number). And when i restart the server the NNNN always change. dev9926 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx inet addr:xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx Bcast:xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx Mask: xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx inet6 addr: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Scope:Link UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:8304 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:1 frame:0 TX packets:3848 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:1 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:937839 (915.8 KiB) TX bytes:351719 (343.4 KiB) Interrupt:11 Base address:0xdf00 -- Regards, Mark Quitoriano, CCNA Fan the flame... http://www.spreadfirefox.com/?q=user/register&r=19441

3 6

Open Source NAS/NFS solution
by Tom Brown 02 Aug '06

02 Aug '06

Hi Has anyone got any ideas on a nfs/nas appliance that i can install on x86 hardware with a few JBOD shelves attached to it. I would like an appliance like install and based on CentOS would be great. I really like the look of www.openfiler.com but it seems to be only in RC release stage so i don't think the 'boss' would like that idea. thanks

4 4

Netgear FA312 Wake-on-Lan problem
by Steve Campbell 02 Aug '06

02 Aug '06

I have just noticed what appears to be a problem with my CentOS 3.7 servers shutting down. I have Netgear FA312 NICs in some of my DELL PowerEdge 700 servers and this particular NIC has WOL ability. I cannot turn this off in the BIOS or limit the error responses. When I do a "halt", the server goes only as far as closing the ethernet card and stops, resulting in a hardboot being necessary. I guess this is not an error, as it indicates it is staying awake for WOL, but I don't have it plugged in to the motherboard. Does anyone have a clue as to how I should disable this stuff to allow a clean shutdown? (without the need to replace the type of NIC, which is the next solution) Thanks Steve Campbell campbell(a)cnpapers.com Charleston Newspapers

1 0

[Solved] My SSL connection is very slow
by dan1 02 Aug '06

02 Aug '06

> Hello all. > > I have a problem since months with my CentOS 4 webserver. It came up since > I intalled it. > The SSL pages are very slow. Typically, I get 2-3 thumbnails from an SSL > page, and then nothing during 7 seconds, and then again 2 thumbnails, > nothing again, etc.. and so forth during about 30 seconds after what all > non loaded images are just discarded (time out). > It also happens with the normal HTTP, but much less, and is usable. > > I must have done an error in the configuration, but I don't know where. > I have tried taking the ssl.conf, httpd.conf and php.ini from another > clean CentOS server (that does not present this) but after rebooting the > services nothing changes. I don't see anything strange in the logs > neither. It just takes very long to answer a request. > I also tried to stop MySQL and Tomcat, but no chance. > > Did someone already see that kind of behaviour ? > > Kind regards, > Daniel > I came some time ago with an SSL slowness that I didn't figure out (described above). I have just found what the problem was: I was using the LinWiz iptables firewall builder, and this one did set by default to have a limitation for synfloods at 1 syn per second (at the end of the script). This, used with SSL, makes the HTTPS connection transfer speed being very very slow, but not for the HTTP connections. Now I incremented it to 50/s and 100 burst limitation, and all works very well. For those that this might help.. Daniel

1 0

CentOS and Intel S5000PAL NIC problem
by Mindaugas Kiznis 02 Aug '06

02 Aug '06

Hello, - I have posted this to the Rocks Clusters discussion list, I will try here too. I have problems installing Rocks 4.1 and 4.2 Beta, which is based on CentOS 4.3 on Intel S5000PAL server board. My guess is that the installion requires "10/100/1000 Intel® 82563EB PHYs supporting Intel® I/O Acceleration Technology" to be fully up. However, the included e1000 module seems to be not the latest and does not fit the mentioned NIC. Intel publishes driver sources. My question, is there any version of the latest e1000 in driver disk format for CentOS 4.3/RHEL4? Will appreciate any comments. Thank you! -- Best Regards, Mindaugas Kiznis BGM Systems Manager M.K.Ciurlionio 17, LT-03104 Vilnius mailto:mindaugas@bgm.lt http://www.bgm.lt

1 0

firefox i386 1.5.0.5-0.el4.1.centos4
by kenkensmile＠netscape.net 02 Aug '06

02 Aug '06

Hi all I am using CentOS 4.3 and my default language is Japanese. I am using firefox with Japanese language. I installed firefox i386 1.5.0.5-0.el4.1.centos4 update 15 M on my computer via yum yesterday. CentOS 4.3 has been acting strange! Japanese language on firefix has gone and English seems to be default language on firefox. I simply removed firefox 1.5.0.5-0.el4.1.centos4 and reinstalled firefox 1.0.7-1.4.3.centos4, so I can use firefox with Japanese language. Would you know why this is happening? Is this happening only to me? I installed firefox extensions on firefox 1.0.7-1.4.3.centos4. Does it affect on firefox i386 1.5.0.5-0.el4.1.centos4? Thanks.

3 5

thunderbird.i386 0:1.5.0.5-0.el4.1.centos4
by kenkensmile＠netscape.net 02 Aug '06

02 Aug '06

Hi all, I installed thunderbird.i386 0:1.5.0.5-0.el4.1.centos4 on my computer. However, the icon on my panel has been disappeared. Is that bug? Regards, Joe

3 2

CentOS-announce Digest, Vol 18, Issue 2
by centos-announce-request＠centos.org 02 Aug '06

02 Aug '06

Send CentOS-announce mailing list submissions to centos-announce(a)centos.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-announce or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to centos-announce-request(a)centos.org You can reach the person managing the list at centos-announce-owner(a)centos.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of CentOS-announce digest..." Today's Topics: 1. CEBA-2006:0613 Important CentOS 4 x86_64 freetype - bugfix update (Johnny Hughes) 2. CEBA-2006:0613 Important CentOS 4 i386 freetype - bugfix update (Johnny Hughes) 3. CESA-2006:0611 Critical CentOS 4 s390(x) thunderbird - security update (Pasi Pirhonen) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2006 07:25:44 -0500 From: Johnny Hughes <johnny(a)centos.org> Subject: [CentOS-announce] CEBA-2006:0613 Important CentOS 4 x86_64 freetype - bugfix update To: CentOS-Announce <centos-announce(a)centos.org> Message-ID: <1154435144.4880.18.camel(a)myth.home.local> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" CentOS Errata and Bugfix Advisory 2006:0613 https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2006-0613.html The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently syncing to the mirrors: x86_64: freetype-2.1.9-4.el4.i386.rpm freetype-2.1.9-4.el4.x86_64.rpm freetype-demos-2.1.9-4.el4.x86_64.rpm freetype-devel-2.1.9-4.el4.x86_64.rpm freetype-utils-2.1.9-4.el4.x86_64.rpm src: freetype-2.1.9-4.el4.src.rpm THIS FIXES THE BROKEN CENTOS-4 FIREFOX UPDATE ... and other things (see the above link for more info).

1 0

enabling core dumps
by Larry Vaden 02 Aug '06

02 Aug '06

How does one enable core dumps for a daemon process? ulimit -c unlimited make sure permission to write is OK (e.g., /var/tmp) what else? rgds/ldv

2 2

x86_64 reproducible server PANIC with latest kernel
by Kay Diederichs 02 Aug '06

02 Aug '06

Our Tyan VX50 server, which is otherwise stable, can be crashed by a specific user who starts a Java application. Relevant facts are: x86_64 CentOS 4.3 fully updated (but otherwise default config) 8 Dual-Core Opteron 870 (2 GHz), giving 16 cores 32 GB memory (running at DDR333) The panic is reproducible within a couple of minutes. I tried the 2.6.9-42 largesmp kernel from J.Baron's website because it has some fixes, but the result is the same as with 2.6.9-34.0.2-largesmp . The panic is not triggered by memory overcommitment, when the crash occurs, there is still 8GB free memory and the swap space is untouched. This is the start of the dmesg output which I could capture from a "netconsole": NMI Watchdog detected LOCKUP, CPU=6, registers: CPU 6 Modules linked in: vmnet(U) vmmon(U) netconsole netdump ppdev nfs nfsd exportfs lockd nfs_acl md5 ipv6 parport_pc lp parport autofs4 w83627hf i2c_sensor i2c_isa i2c_dev i2c_core sunrpc ipt_REJECT ipt_state ip_conntrack iptable_filter ip_tables dm_mirror dm_mod button battery ac ohci_hcd ehci_hcd tg3 floppy ext3 jbd raid1 raid0 sata_nv libata sd_mod scsi_mod Pid: 16269, comm: java Tainted: PF 2.6.9-42.ELlargesmp RIP: 0010:[<ffffffff8030a9aa>] <ffffffff8030a9aa>{.text.lock.spinlock+46} RSP: 0000:000001032d1a1e08 EFLAGS: 00000086 RAX: 000001032c2e5030 RBX: 00000107fc53dac8 RCX: 0000000000000000 RDX: 000001032d1a1f58 RSI: 000001032d1a1ef8 RDI: 00000107fc53dac8 RBP: 000001032d1a1e78 R08: 0000000000000007 R09: 0000002a95905ac8 R10: 0000002a95905ad6 R11: 0000000000000000 R12: 0000000000000000 R13: 000001032d1a1ef8 R14: 000001032d1a1f58 R15: 000001032c2e5708 FS: 0000000042a7b960(005b) GS:ffffffff804f8000(0000) knlGS:00000000f7e886c0 CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 CR2: 0000002a95ed2f88 CR3: 00000006fc7a2000 CR4: 00000000000006e0 Process java (pid: 16269, threadinfo 000001032d1a0000, task 000001032c2e5030) Stack: 000001032d1a1f58 ffffffff80142d80 0000000042a78610 000001032d1a1f58 0000000042a78610 0000000000000000 0000002be7877da0 0000000000000042 000001032d1a1ef8 ffffffff8010f6fb Call Trace:<ffffffff80142d80>{get_signal_to_deliver+64} <ffffffff8010f6fb>{do_signal+131} <ffffffff801100b4>{sys_rt_sigreturn+619} <ffffffff80110129>{sys_rt_sigreturn+736} <ffffffff80110902>{retint_signal+62} Code: 83 3b 00 7e f9 e9 91 fd ff ff f3 90 83 3b 00 7e f9 e9 cf fd Kernel panic - not syncing: nmi watchdog ----------- [cut here ] --------- [please bite here ] --------- Kernel BUG at panic:75 invalid operand: 0000 [1] SMP CPU 6 Modules linked in: vmnet(U) vmmon(U) netconsole netdump ppdev nfs nfsd exportfs lockd nfs_acl md5 ipv6 parport_pc lp parport autofs4 w83627hf i2c_sensor i2c_isa i2c_dev i2c_core sunrpc ipt_REJECT ipt_state ip_conntrack iptable_filter ip_tables dm_mirror dm_mod button battery ac ohci_hcd ehci_hcd tg3 floppy ext3 jbd raid1 raid0 sata_nv libata sd_mod scsi_mod Pid: 16269, comm: java Tainted: PF 2.6.9-42.ELlargesmp RIP: 0010:[<ffffffff801376ae>] <ffffffff801376ae>{panic+211} RSP: 0000:00000102fc7a6da8 EFLAGS: 00010086 RAX: 000000000000002c RBX: ffffffff8031d55d RCX: 0000000000000046 RDX: 0000000000029c01 RSI: 0000000000000046 RDI: ffffffff803e3700 RBP: 00000102fc7a6f58 R08: 0000000000000004 R09: ffffffff8031d55d R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000029 R12: 0000000000000000 R13: 000001032d1a1ef8 R14: 000001032d1a1f58 R15: 000001032c2e5708 FS: 0000000042a7b960(005b) GS:ffffffff804f8000(0000) knlGS:00000000f7e886c0 CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 CR2: 0000002a95ed2f88 CR3: 00000006fc7a2000 CR4: 00000000000006e0 Process java (pid: 16269, threadinfo 000001032d1a0000, task 000001032c2e5030) Stack: 0000003000000008 00000102fc7a6e88 00000102fc7a6dc8 0000000000000013 0000000000000000 0000000000000046 0000000000029bd5 0000000000000046 0000000000000004 ffffffff8031fad8 Call Trace:<ffffffff80111860>{show_stack+241} <ffffffff8011198a>{show_registers+277} <ffffffff80111c91>{die_nmi+130} <ffffffff8011d055>{nmi_watchdog_tick+210} <ffffffff8011255e>{default_do_nmi+112} <ffffffff8011d10b>{do_nmi+115} <ffffffff80111173>{paranoid_exit+0} <ffffffff8030a9aa>{.text.lock.spinlock+46} <ffffffff8013b98a>{it_real_fn+0} <ffffffff8013b98a>{it_real_fn+0} Code: 0f 0b dd da 31 80 ff ff ff ff 4b 00 31 ff e8 83 c1 fe ff e8 RIP <ffffffff801376ae>{panic+211} RSP <00000102fc7a6da8> Modules linked in: vmnet(U) vmmon(U) netconsole netdump ppdev nfs nfsd exportfs lockd nfs_acl md5 ipv6 parport_pc lp parport autofs4 w83627hf i2c_sensor i2c_isa i2c_dev i2c_core sunrpc ipt_REJECT ipt_state ip_conntrack iptable_filter ip_tables dm_mirror dm_mod button battery ac ohci_hcd ehci_hcd tg3 floppy ext3 jbd raid1 raid0 sata_nv libata sd_mod scsi_mod Pid: 16269, comm: java Tainted: PF 2.6.9-42.ELlargesmp RIP: 0010:[<ffffffff801376ae>] <ffffffff801376ae>{panic+211} RSP: 0000:00000102fc7a6da8 EFLAGS: 00010086 RAX: 000000000000002c RBX: ffffffff8031d55d RCX: 0000000000000046 RDX: 0000000000029c01 RSI: 0000000000000046 RDI: ffffffff803e3700 RBP: 00000102fc7a6f58 R08: 0000000000000004 R09: ffffffff8031d55d R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000029 R12: 0000000000000000 R13: 000001032d1a1ef8 R14: 000001032d1a1f58 R15: 000001032c2e5708 FS: 0000000042a7b960(005b) GS:ffffffff804f8000(0000) knlGS:00000000f7e886c0 CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 CR2: 0000002a95ed2f88 CR3: 00000006fc7a2000 CR4: 00000000000006e0 Call Trace:<ffffffff8013769a>{panic+191} <ffffffff80111860>{show_stack+241} <ffffffff8011198a>{show_registers+277} <ffffffff80111c91>{die_nmi+130} <ffffffff8011d055>{nmi_watchdog_tick+210} <ffffffff8011255e>{default_do_nmi+112} <ffffffff8011d10b>{do_nmi+115} <ffffffff80111173>{paranoid_exit+0} <ffffffff8030a9aa>{.text.lock.spinlock+46} <ffffffff8013b98a>{it_real_fn+0} <ffffffff8013b98a>{it_real_fn+0} sibling task PC pid father child younger older init S 000000010fc7345e 0 1 0 2 (NOTLB) 00000101000a1d78 0000000000000002 00000101000a1e58 ffffffff00000075 0000000000000000 00000000000a1e58 000001060006aa80 0000000e00000246 0000010037ecb7f0 0000000000001b5d Call Trace:<ffffffff8013fa18>{__mod_timer+293} <ffffffff8030a1ef>{schedule_timeout+367} <ffffffff80140442>{process_timeout+0} <ffffffff8018add7>{do_select+939} <ffffffff8018a971>{__pollwait+0} <ffffffff8018b156>{sys_select+820} <ffffffff8011026a>{system_call+126} migration/0 S 0000010008002a20 0 2 1 3 (L-TLB) 00000102fc72dec8 0000000000000046 0000010100069760 0000000000000002 00000001fc72dec8 0000000000000000 0000000000000012 0000000000000001 000001010001f7f0 00000000000002b7 Call Trace:<ffffffff80133b66>{__wake_up_common+67} <ffffffff80134c85>{migration_thread+323} <ffffffff80134b42>{migration_thread+0} <ffffffff8014b22a>{kthread+199} <ffffffff80110f47>{child_rip+8} <ffffffff8014b163>{kthread+0} <ffffffff80110f3f>{child_rip+0} ksoftirqd/0 S 0000000000000000 0 3 1 4 2 (L-TLB) 00000104fc73ff08 0000000000000046 0000010400000000 0000000000000246 00000104fc73e000 0000000000000246 0000010008004cc0 0000000000000000 000001010001f030 000000000000028b Call Trace:<ffffffff8013c9f4>{ksoftirqd+0} <ffffffff8013ca30>{ksoftirqd+60} <ffffffff8014b22a>{kthread+199} <ffffffff80110f47>{child_rip+8} <ffffffff8014b163>{kthread+0} <ffffffff80110f3f>{child_rip+0} The full output is at http://strucbio.biologie.uni-konstanz.de/~kay/crash.log . Can anybody tell me what's wrong? thanks, Kay -- Kay Diederichs http://strucbio.biologie.uni-konstanz.de email: Kay.Diederichs(a)uni-konstanz.de Tel +49 7531 88 4049 Fax 3183 Fachbereich Biologie, Universität Konstanz, Box M647, D-78457 Konstanz

3 4

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

Discuss