similar to: Loooooooooooong Delay processing Actions.Drop and Actions.Reject

Hi everyone, I am having a difficult time with winbindd in order to connect to my shared directories on my HP-UX box. I am running samba 2.2.3a on HP-UX 11, and here is what's happenning: I can start winbindd (I'm using -i -d 3 to monitor it), and using wbinfo -u I can list the domain users. I have joined the domain using smbpasswd -r PDC -j DOMAIN -U admin%password, I get the reply

Hi all, I am having a real bizarre problem with Samba 2.2.2 on Solaris 8. I have set up the smb.conf to share all user's home folders, and want to ensure that all dot files are visible. The problem I am having is that the dot files all appear except for one specific one (which happens to be the exact file that is needed!). I can see it when I telnet, but not using Samba. The dot file is a

Gregory Pleau wrote: >> >> The problem that you had with LDAP causing long Shorewall startup has >> resurfaced. In your mail to me, you mentioned that you had found that >> the issue was a permissions problem but gave no details. >> >> Would you be so kind as to give me the details so I can pass them on to >> the current sufferer? I notice that you are

Hello, With reference to the problems listed below. I too am having incredibly long start up times. I''m talking minutes here (around 5 minutes). My configuration is not complex I don''t think. We are you using ldap too and the settings are bellow. The network is up as I''m restarting shorewall whilst the machine is running. Any suggestions? Is there no way to

Hi, I'm looking to disable rejecting calls from my call center employees. They are using Polycom phones. Is there a way to either disable the reject/DND features on the Polycom phones (don`t think so) or have the Asterisk PBX ignore "Got SIP response 486 "Busy Here" back from 12.23.34.45" response from specific phones/SIP registrations and just keep on ringing?

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=696 Phil Oester <netfilter at linuxace.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |netfilter at linuxace.com --- Comment #2 from Phil Oester <netfilter at linuxace.com> 2013-06-20

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=696 --- Comment #3 from Alessandro Vesely <vesely at tana.it> 2013-06-21 15:50:56 CEST --- (In reply to comment #2) > you have to put this REJECT rule before any RELATED/ESTABLISHED > conntrack ctstate match rules (which is suboptimal). No, I can use conntrack -D to have the connection unESTABLISHED. In general, it is polite to send a

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=696 --- Comment #4 from Phil Oester <netfilter at linuxace.com> 2013-06-21 20:09:31 CEST --- > The kernel manages the seq and > ack_seq counters itself, so it doesn't have to try ...for locally terminated connections, yes. But what about forwarded traffic? That is where the difficulty comes in. Netfilter would need to be able to

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=696 --- Comment #5 from Alessandro Vesely <vesely at tana.it> 2013-06-22 10:05:55 CEST --- (In reply to comment #4) >> The kernel manages the seq and ack_seq counters itself, so it doesn't have >> to try > > ...for locally terminated connections, yes. But what about forwarded traffic? > That is where the difficulty

I'm using dovecot-1.2-sieve-0.1.15 with dovecot-1.2.11. I have a reject test filter that looks like this: require "reject"; if header :contains "subject" "reject" { reject "bye"; } Is there any way to get a "reject" filter to send back a 550 reject as detailed in http://ietfreport.isoc.org/idref/rfc5429/#section-2.5 rather than a MDN? The

Hi all, I''m trying to make pretty URLs using routes for some of my actions across different controllers. For example: http://www.example.com/london -> http://www.example.com/articles/show_by_name/london But if the id ''about'' couldn''t be found, then to search for it as another action, this time from the ''branch'' controller.

I''ve got a rather simple question about the actions packaged with Shorewall. I know there are a group of actions included in actions.std that are processed when Shorewall starts up. Most of these are Allow actions, and I assume they''re intended for administrative ease of use when adding rules. What I want to confirm is that they do not actually take effect unless called

Hi, I think this is worth a note. It was generally said the decision between deny and reject (aka unreach) could be taken lightly - and most people seem to prefer "deny", which complicates things for an attacker, because packets just vanish without any report and tasks timeout. But from my viewpoint, this argument falls into the category "security by obscurity", and I found

I have created shell script for MRTG statistics of droped/rejected packets: ftp://slovakia.shorewall.net/mirror/shorewall/mrtg/ http://slovakia.shorewall.net/pub/shorewall/mrtg/ rsync://slovakia.shorewall.net/shorewall/mrtg/ example: http://slovakia.shorewall.net/pub/shorewall/mrtg/example/ It is not based on /var/log/messages (syslog), but iptables counter. A lot of packets are droped/rejected

mrtg-drop-hits v1.3 Thanx a lot to Steve Cowles for his help and improvements CHANGELOG: 1.3 - 2003-01-10 - fix: size of counter_file equals zero - Bering/ash compatibiliy added by Steve Cowles - INSTALL.snmp added by Steve Cowles - small cleanup in INSTALL ftp://slovakia.shorewall.net/mirror/shorewall/mrtg/ http://slovakia.shorewall.net/pub/shorewall/mrtg/

The reason these are rejected and not dropped are that many programs use Ident as a way to validate the client. If the host gets no reply (even a reject) it will hang waiting. This is the reason you see people complain about slow POP access or FTP lag., etc. Oh yea, don''t try and go near IRC without Ident.... Wayne > Hi John, > > Recently I requested much the same info.

I have users in my dialplan that go from SIP to Cell When they are at their desk and they hit reject call, it goes to the next thing in the dialplan, thus transferring to their cell. Not what they want. Is it possible to change the reject button to make it go to voice mail or a new ext? Thanks Jason

hello, I'm quite new to dovecot. My instalation is working good Debian Etch - exim: 4.63-17 - dovecot: 1.0.rc15 I'm using virtual user setup, with LDA delivery method. There is no database backend at this time. Is there any way to configure exim to reject non-existing user /asking dovecot lda/ at SMTP time. The standard exim configuration in ACL section do not work: --- cut ---

Hello, I have noticed that since release 5.x of openssh, the scp command rejects remote user names with white spaces. (We have such user names on Windows hosts) For instance: $ scp myfile "my user"@machine:. used to work with openssh-4.2p1 and fails with 5.2p1 and 5.3p1: my user: invalid user name. I have traced this down to revision 1.129 of scp.c which now calls okname(). OTOH,

I don't reply to messages send to me in private. Best regards, Arjen -- Please keep list traffic on the list -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: Rudolf Cejka <cejkar op fit.vutbr.cz> Subject: NUT and removed allowfrom/ACCEPT/REJECT support Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2009 19:23:17 +0200 Size: 3148 URL: