Just installed a snapshot on a Supermicro SYS-5015A-EHF and wanted to say how much I liked the installation improvements - the little things really do add up. Used the pxeboot for the first time as well - faster and easier than dealing with a usb drive and cheaper than buying an external CD drive. Chris

Hello, I'm building up an OpenBSD box on an Atom D510 (dual core) platform running -current . Use will be strictly as a firewall running PF. I've read that SMP doesn't really help PF, but it may assist in speeding up compiling when keeping up with -current. What are the tradeoffs here? Will the mp kernel harm PF performance? As x86 and amd64 are both supported are there any strong arguments for running either one? Thanks, Chris

Newsletter COMPUCITY MINERVA Expertos en tecnologia Suscriptor: misc@openbsd.org Cambiar la suscripcisn ( http://infocomputerland.com/index.php?option=com_acajoom&Itemid=1&act=change&a... ) De-suscribirse ( http://infocomputerland.com/index.php?option=com_acajoom&Itemid=1&act=unsubscr... ) Powered by Joobi ( http://www.joobisoft.com )

Hello misc@, I'm recently having trouble suspending/hibernating an IBM X31 laptop. It used to work flawlessly with either the Fn+F4/F12 keys or with 'apm -z', but after a recent update (Aug. 24th snapshot) it won't anymore. The behavior I'm experiencing is that the suspend LED flashes, as it should, but the display remains active and then freezes (keyboard/mouse don't work at all) and I have to power down. If I'm in X then the display first switches to the console before freezing. It may be ...

Also, I forgot to tell: The laptop is running OpenBSD 4.7 Regards, Alvaro

Yep. The Swedish listing seems a little outdated. And references are always nice. /Johan

Hi, We need help/support with setting up a couple of pf firewalls with carp etc. and are of course willing to pay for it if we find the right resource. Please reply off list if you're interested or can recommend a company/person whom you think can help us. Thanks Johan Linnir

El conocimiento tiene cupo Limitado Confirme su asistencia Congreso Nacional de Negociacisn y Rentabilidad en COMPRAS Guadalajara 27 y 28 de Septiembre Monterrey 23 y 24 de Septiembre Mexico DF 30 de Septiembre y 01 de Octubre Este congreso le ofrece los principios, criterios y directrices mas efectivos para establecer alianzas poderosas que incrementen las utilidades de su empresa y fortalezcan una red de proveedores confiables. Mayores Informes al 01800 2502030 Lada sin Costo Tel: ...

afaik, it just uses the normal routing table, you can't force a specific interface/nexthop. if that's correct, to have relayd check connectivity beyond the gateways, you'll need static routes (e.g. host 8.8.8.8 via connection A, 208.67.222.222 via connection B) and use those hosts as it may work to set the source address (ping -I, traceroute -s) and use a route-to pf rule to make sure packets with a specific source address are directed out of the relevant interface...though if you only have ...

of my goal. I can detect a failure and "down" that route, however, once I delete the default route from the routing table for the failed connection, I can no longer test it with traceroute. This is because it doesn't appear to Taking a look at the bigger picture, the 'correct' way to do this is to have redundancy at the firewall level as well at ISP link level. This gives higher availability, and makes your problem much easier. If you have a single ISP link per firewall then link testing is ...

interface/nexthop. if that's correct, to have relayd check connectivity beyond the gateways, you'll need static routes (e.g. host 8.8.8.8 via connection A, 208.67.222.222 via connection B) and use those hosts as an route-to pf rule to make sure packets with a specific source address are directed out of the relevant interface...though if you only have one address to play with for each connection you might be unable to distinguish "check" packets from normal packets. I tried out Stuart's ...