Bradey Honsinger
2003-Jan-10 20:49 UTC
[Shorewall-users] Shorewall site search is now available agai n
Hmm--either the indexing process is still running, or it''s broken again. It''s 0443 GMT, and I can''t get the search engine to find anything on the mailing list or the web site (I used ''dns'' as my search term). It''s not that big of an inconvenience, though--Googling for ''site:shorewall.net dns'' does pretty much the same thing. - Bradey -----Original Message----- From: Tom Eastep [mailto:teastep@shorewall.net] Sent: Friday, January 10, 2003 9:35 AM To: Shorewall Announcements; Shorewall Users Subject: [Shorewall-users] Shorewall site search is now available again I have been separating the content of my site into mailing list and other content with an eye toward moving the main site to another system. In that process, I managed to break the search function. I believe that I have everything put back together now -- please let me know if you find any problems. Again, I apologize for the inconvenience. -Tom -- Tom Eastep \ Shorewall - iptables made easy Shoreline, \ http://shorewall.sf.net Washington USA \ teastep@shorewall.net _______________________________________________ Shorewall-users mailing list Shorewall-users@shorewall.net http://mail.shorewall.net/mailman/listinfo/shorewall-users
Tom Eastep
2003-Jan-10 20:55 UTC
[Shorewall-users] Shorewall site search is now available agai n
--On Friday, January 10, 2003 08:48:41 PM -0800 Bradey Honsinger <BradeyH@construx.com> wrote:> Hmm--either the indexing process is still running, or it''s broken again. > It''s 0443 GMT, and I can''t get the search engine to find anything on the > mailing list or the web site (I used ''dns'' as my search term). > > It''s not that big of an inconvenience, though--Googling for > ''site:shorewall.net dns'' does pretty much the same thing. >Sorry -- my DNS reconfiguration broke it this time. The indexing process is still running since it failed originally. -Tom -- Tom Eastep \ Shorewall - iptables made easy Shoreline, \ http://shorewall.sf.net Washington USA \ teastep@shorewall.net
Tom Eastep
2003-Jan-10 21:02 UTC
[Shorewall-users] Shorewall site search is now available agai n
--On Friday, January 10, 2003 08:55:53 PM -0800 Tom Eastep <teastep@shorewall.net> wrote:>> > > Sorry -- my DNS reconfiguration broke it this time. The indexing process > is still running since it failed originally. >Indexing is complete. -Tom -- Tom Eastep \ Shorewall - iptables made easy Shoreline, \ http://shorewall.sf.net Washington USA \ teastep@shorewall.net
Dear all, I have 2 firewall, I installed Shorewall-1.3.12 with 2 interface for each, -The first fw use for local network and internet, I installed wondershaper 1.1a for limit the bandwidth. I checked memory in the fw, when fw start the memory about 40Mb, and I checked it after 10 hours the memory about 120Mb (fw machine have 128 MB RAM). My question is what the matter? - The second fw use for DMZ use proxyarp, I try to ping to DMZ, the time in the first line reply about 800ms, the second less than 10ms. I don''t why? Thanks for answer ! Le Van
On Fri, 2003-01-10 at 22:07, Techcom-Kythuat wrote:> I have 2 firewall, I installed Shorewall-1.3.12 with 2 interface for > each, > -The first fw use for local network and internet, I installed > wondershaper 1.1a for limit the bandwidth. I checked memory in the fw, > when fw start the memory about 40Mb, and I checked it after 10 hours the > memory about 120Mb (fw machine have 128 MB RAM). My question is what the > matter?Le, You didn''t provide enough information for us to determine what is using your memory. Please read the support page below. Thanks. http://shorewall.net/support.htm These commands may help you find the memory problem. $ cat /proc/meminfo or $ free -m $ ps -aux> - The second fw use for DMZ use proxyarp, I try to ping to DMZ, > the time in the first line reply about 800ms, the second less than > 10ms. I don''t why? > Thanks for answer !This message in the list archive may help. # [Shorewall-users] ping from local to net http://mail.shorewall.net/pipermail/shorewall-users/2003-January/004422.html -- Mike Noyes <mhnoyes @ users.sourceforge.net> http://sourceforge.net/users/mhnoyes/ http://leaf-project.org/ http://sitedocs.sf.net/ http://ffl.sf.net/
> -The first fw use for local network and internet, I installed > wondershaper 1.1a for limit the bandwidth. I checked memory in the fw, > when fw start the memory about 40Mb, and I checked it after 10 hours the > memory about 120Mb (fw machine have 128 MB RAM). My question is what the > matter?You do not give enough detail for us to tell you anything. But, look at this j2@cookiemonster:~$ free total used free shared buffers cached Mem: 255056 250704 4352 0 16300 196040 Would you say that "That machine is using 250MB of RAM"? If so you are wrong (or rather, you do not understand how to read the output of ''free'') It is using 250704 - 16300 - 196040 = 38364 = About 38MB of RAM.> - The second fw use for DMZ use proxyarp, I try to ping to DMZ, > the time in the first line reply about 800ms, the second less than > 10ms. I don''t why? > Thanks for answer !Pretty normal for whenever the ARP-cache is "stale" and needs refreshing.