search for: punches

Hi, I read about the invitation protocol that will be introduced in 1.1pre8. Is there any mechanism of UDP hole punching to establish a VPN behind NAT? Cheers, Nik -- Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Mobiltelefon mit K-9 Mail gesendet. -------------- n?chster Teil -------------- Ein Dateianhang mit HTML-Daten wurde abgetrennt... URL:

On 08/02/2018 02:05 PM, Nir Soffer wrote: > When using file systems not supporting ZERO_RANGE (e.g. NFS 4.2) or > block device on kernel < 4.9, we used to call fallocate() for every > zero, fail with EOPNOTSUPP, and fallback to manual zeroing. When > trimming, we used to try unsupported fallocate() on every call. > > Change file handle to remember if punching holes or

Hi all, many thanks for the replies! On 14/05/18 19:05, Parke wrote: > On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 4:44 AM, Keith Whyte <keith at rhizomatica.org> wrote: >> but then I read that no, each host much have the key of >> the other to establish the direct connection. But I am looking at >> tcpdump right now in the terminal and seeing the UDP tunnel packets >> flowing from

I have a number of datasets that are multipunch column-binary format. Does anyone have any advice on how to read this into R? Thanks. David

When using file systems not supporting ZERO_RANGE (e.g. NFS 4.2) or block device on kernel < 4.9, we used to call fallocate() for every zero, fail with EOPNOTSUPP, and fallback to manual zeroing. When trimming, we used to try unsupported fallocate() on every call. Change file handle to remember if punching holes or zeroing range are supported, and avoid unsupported calls. - can_trim changed

Wasn't there a TV series in the 1960s about a US soldier who got made up to general thanks to the accidental over punching of paper tape? Regards, Martin, >-----Original Message----- >From: centos-bounces at centos.org [mailto:centos-bounces at centos.org] On >Behalf Of Always Learning >Sent: 10 July 2014 11:43 >To: CentOS mailing list >Subject: Re: [CentOS] Cemtos 7 :

This is the second version to support efficient zero for block devices on older kernels (e.g. RHEL 7.5), and file systems that do not support yet FALLOC_FS_ZERO_RANGE (e.g. NFS 4.2). Changes since v1: - Split to smaller patches - Skip linux only includes on other systems - Skip code using BLKZEROOUT if the macro is not defined - Try BLKZEROOUT only if the offset and count are aligned to device

On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 10:30 PM Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com> wrote: > On 08/02/2018 02:05 PM, Nir Soffer wrote: > > When using file systems not supporting ZERO_RANGE (e.g. NFS 4.2) or > > block device on kernel < 4.9, we used to call fallocate() for every > > zero, fail with EOPNOTSUPP, and fallback to manual zeroing. When > > trimming, we used to try

On 13 April 2018 at 19:34, Alex Corcoles <alex at corcoles.net> wrote: > > Note that it would be easier to set up tinc nodes on your Windows > > desktop and Linux laptops, to avoid the additional complication of > > having to relay broadcast packets between your local networks and the > > tinc network. This is what I do in my setup. > > But both systems will

On Thu, Aug 02, 2018 at 10:05:28PM +0300, Nir Soffer wrote: > File systems not supporting FALLOC_FL_ZERO_RANGE yet fall back to manual > zeroing. > > We can avoid this by combining two fallocate calls: > > fallocate(FALLOC_FL_PUNHCH_HOLE) "PUNCH" > fallocate(0) > +#ifdef FALLOC_FL_PUNCH_HOLE > + /* If we can punch hole but may not trim, we can

Even if the hole punching is executed, the modification time of the file is not updated. So, current time is set to inode. Signed-off-by: Tsutomu Itoh <t-itoh@jp.fujitsu.com> --- fs/btrfs/file.c | 3 +++ 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) diff --git a/fs/btrfs/file.c b/fs/btrfs/file.c index 110d3cb..15fecc1 100644 --- a/fs/btrfs/file.c +++ b/fs/btrfs/file.c @@ -1964,6 +1964,9 @@ out_trans:

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11588 Bug ID: 11588 Summary: missing option: preallocate for all files except for sparse Product: rsync Version: 3.1.2 Hardware: x64 OS: Linux Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P5 Component: core

On Sun, Aug 19, 2018 at 01:13:05AM +0300, Nir Soffer wrote: > When using file systems not supporting ZERO_RANGE (e.g. NFS 4.2) or > block device on kernel < 4.9, we used to call fallocate() for every > zero, fail with EOPNOTSUPP, and fallback to manual zeroing. When > trimming, we used to try unsupported fallocate() on every call. > > Change file handle to remember if

Because of space limitations and because of the location of the punch-down blocks, my * server is located on the shelf in a coat closet. Sadly, there is not enough space (or ventilation) for the monitor and keyboard. This will all change when we move to new quarters, but... Does anyone have experience running Linux/Asterisk without a monitor? What, if any, are the issues? TIA

Hello list, I want to listen to voicemails on my * box from a phone that is not local to my pbx. I.e., from my cellphone or my PSTN work line etc. I'm aware that I can forward VM to email or use a web interface but that is not always practical. Other than doing an IVR type arrangement or a phone number dedicated to VM access is there a way to do this? On my old POTS line I used to be

We're currently support two paths from VFS to preallocate unwritten extents(from FS_IOC_RESVSP, or fallocate()), likewise, behavior of punching-hole should be treated as the same, this patch tries to teach file_ioctl() to handle FS_IOC_UNRESVSP, underlying filesystem like ocfs2 is wise enough to do the rest of work;-) Signed-off-by: Tristan Ye <tristan.ye at oracle.com> --- fs/ioctl.c

We're currently support two paths from VFS to preallocate unwritten extents(from FS_IOC_RESVSP, or fallocate()), likewise, behavior of punching-hole should be treated as the same, this patch tries to teach file_ioctl() to handle FS_IOC_UNRESVSP, underlying filesystem like ocfs2 is wise enough to do the rest of work;-) Signed-off-by: Tristan Ye <tristan.ye at oracle.com> --- fs/ioctl.c

Any tips or guidance on improving the probability of being able to connect to a Tinc daemon. I am currently on a guest wifi at a hospital for my in-laws family. Wanting to pass time and be semi productive, I tried to VPN back to my private networks but it appears the default port Tinc users is blocked. Here is what I know about their firewall:

Hi Guus, Unfortunately, I often notice that even with the advanced UDP hole punching mechanisms that tinc uses, I still come across cases on my network where two nodes behind NATs cannot talk to each other because one of the nodes is behind a "strict" NAT that won't use consistent source ports for UDP packets that are sent to different destination addresses. More formally, this

Hello, I have an Adit 600 (3 FXS cards) hooked up to a digium T1 card in my asterisk box. I 'connected' the slots to the a:1 T1 interfaces via the command line. The slots (3 fxs) are configured with 'ls' signaling. I configured the T1 card with the same line settings as the T1 interfaces on the adit and I get green lights on both the T1 card and the T1 interface on the adit (so