similar to: IANA ups/401

I would like to suggest that if we modify the IANA registration of nut/3493, we do it formally using the official IANA form https://www.iana.org/form/ports-services , and that we agree on the form contents before submitting it. For example, who is the new assignee and who is the new contact? The last thing the IANA services manager needs is to talk to an unstructured crowd of us. Roger On

Hello, I am in the process of enhancing the work of Luiz Angelo Daros de Luca (https://github.com/luizluca/nut-snmpagent). For that matter, nut needs an official IANA enterprise-ID. Currently Luiz is using the enterprise-ID from his employer, which is obviously not a good idea. Does anybody mind if I apply for a ent.-ID for myself and assign nut a sub-ID from my ID given by IANA? Any better

Andy Wiggin has contribued a Python program that reads http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-address-space and creates a list of reserved subnets suitable for inclusion in /etc/shorewall/rfc1918. The list produced by Andy''s program will be included in the rfc1918 file included in version 1.3.2 (it''s available now from CVS). Thanks Andy! -Tom -- Tom Eastep \ Shorewall -

On Wed, 11 Nov 2020, Jim Klimov wrote: > I agree with you. Probably similar could be done with stunnel, to avoid > maintaining in NUT a fast moving target of modern cryptography. And indeed it > may be better in terms of switching real deployments to new protocols if old > ones are deemed insecure, with implementations made by people hopefully better > knowledgeable about the

Hello all, The reserved addresses list seems to be in flux more lately. Since I have several servers that all run Shorewall, updating /etc/shorewall/rfc1918 has become a little tedious. I put together a shell script that can download the latest file, write a new /etc/shorewall/rfc1918 and restart Shorewall. I run this from a cron job and now don''t have to pay much attention to keeping

http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-users/2003-March/008088.html "why is there such a delay in getting ipv6 rolled out when it solves all these problems ?" === There are many reasons... 1. Leasing Address Space from the I* society (small s...aka the Big Lie Society) is not desirable by all people... 2. The IPv6 Privacy Problem...that is especially important in the area of computer

I tried to close everything I had open and filter as best as I could.. but left random lines in just in case it helps. 172.16.5.230 is my local machine and *.33.235 is the server. This is a slow save.. 13:48:39.852340 (60) 001F5B35DB28 Broadcast UDP - Other Ports 172.16.5.93 172.16.5.255 00:04:53.922946 293.922946 13:48:39.852605 (60) 001F5B35DB28 USC-IANA

The transport type application/ogg may now be used in applications. The IANA has assigned it in their namespace, so start adding it at will. See mail below. Linus ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2003 12:23:47 -0800 From: IANA <iana@iana.org> To: triad@df.lth.se Cc: Allison Mankin <mankin@psg.com>, Scott Bradner <sob@harvard.edu> Subject: RFC-to-be:

After reading this article: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/08/31/blocking_chinese_ip_addresses/ I got to thinking that there is really no reason for *any* traffic to hit my servers that comes from anywhere outside North America. So I wrote the perl script at the end of this posting to extract selected IP ranges posted at iana.org and convert them into iptables rules blocking any traffic

Just idly watching * in console mode and saw that someone from 50.49.54.102 tried to register with my *. whois gives:- OrgName: Internet Assigned Numbers Authority OrgID: IANA Address: 4676 Admiralty Way, Suite 330 City: Marina del Rey StateProv: CA PostalCode: 90292-6695 Country: US NetRange: 50.0.0.0 - 50.255.255.255 CIDR: 50.0.0.0/8 NetName: RESERVED-50

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Mon, 1 Dec 2014, Ian Allison wrote: > I realize I could expand my LDAP but I'm wary of just importing some > random schema. Well, >>random<< schema ;-) you should know what you are doing. Check what is added to your LDAP and you'll be fine. > I've had mixed results doing that in the past (the qmail

Martin Leese wrote: > Subject: [opus] MIME Types and File Extensions > To: opus at xiph.org > Message-ID: > <CAAzqGd_uzR646Nsdt=O2HDxLOYE2=K=5n9UOHLr3Y4BGzdVasw at mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > Hi All, > > On the Xiph Wiki page at: > https://wiki.xiph.org/MIME_Types_and_File_Extensions ... > Could somebody more

"Timothy B. Terriberry"wrote: > Subject: Re: [opus] opus Digest, Vol 72, Issue 4 > Martin Leese wrote: >> Subject: Re: [opus] opus Digest, Vol 72, Issue 4 >> >> Is somebody talking to IANA about replacing >> RFC 5334 to add Opus to the MIME type >> audio/ogg? This needs to be done, and I note >> that draft-ietf-codec-oggopus-06 states: >>

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6582 Summary: blocking characters in filenames Product: rsync Version: 3.0.6 Platform: Other OS/Version: Mac OS X Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned at samba.org ReportedBy: lionel.valero at polymtl.ca

Hi, according to: http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-address-space the bogons table is outdated... tha attached patch fixes that... (done against 2.0.1) -- Regards Thomas PS. please CC me as I''m not subscribed to the list -------------- next part -------------- --- usr/share/shorewall/bogons.old 2004-04-19 18:28:00.000000000 +0300 +++ usr/share/shorewall/bogons 2004-04-20

The IANA has pre-allocated id 4 for ed25519. If waiting on the IANA were a reason to delay applying the SSHFP_KEY_ED25519 patch, it needn't be any longer. I've proposed un-reserving hash type 0 to be a "NULL hash", for those who'd rather publish the public key unhashed. Even if zero for unhashed fails to gain traction, I hope to see something allocated for that. But

Or just set up sane firewall rules to allow the two to talk, but block external traffic. I have run this way for years - all add'rs ar IANA in a subnet block, and just that block is open locally, and all other external IP's severely restricted, and NUT works great . . . - Tim On September 12, 2016 11:47:28 AM CDT, "Stuart D. Gathman" <stuart at gathman.org> wrote: >On

Hello Jean-Marc, Thanks for the quick reply and comments. On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 5:41 PM, Jean-Marc Valin <jmvalin at jmvalin.ca> wrote: > Hi Michael, > > Here's some more minor comments below. As long as you address the two > comments from my previous email (254 -> 2 and the draft name), the draft > is good for submitting as initial version on the IETF website (even

On Wed, January 7, 2009 04:29, Peter Korn wrote: > Decision #4: file system layout > I''d like to have ZFS root mirrored. Do we simply use a portion of the existing disks for this, or add two disks just for root? Use USB-2 flash as those 2 disks? And where does swap go? The default install in Osol 0811 (which is what I just upgraded my home NAS to) gives you a zfs root pool that

Tough to get a spoofed IP to actually route back to it's host though, so other than those unfortunate to be on a flat network, still not too much of an issue . . . - Tim On 09/12/2016 04:46 PM, Stuart D. Gathman wrote: > On Mon, 12 Sep 2016, Tim Dawson wrote: > >> Or just set up sane firewall rules to allow the two to talk, but block >> external traffic. I have run this