similar to: Question on simultaneous IPv4 and IPv6 "any address" listening

Jim Klimov via Nut-upsuser <nut-upsuser at alioth-lists.debian.net> writes: > I've recently found that at least on my test box the `LISTEN *` line had > only set up an IPv4 `0.0.0.0` listener but not an IPv6 `::0` listener for > `upsd`. Interesting. On one system I checked, I have 4 explicit directives for 127.0.0.1, ::1, and the LAN on v4/v6. On another, I have an empty

Jim Klimov via Nut-upsuser <nut-upsuser at alioth-lists.debian.net> writes: > I've recently found that at least on my test box the `LISTEN *` line had > only set up an IPv4 `0.0.0.0` listener but not an IPv6 `::0` listener for > `upsd`. Interesting. On one system I checked, I have 4 explicit directives for 127.0.0.1, ::1, and the LAN on v4/v6. On another, I have an empty

Thanks to everyone for a fruitful discussion, links and ideas. The result is nearing a merge at https://github.com/networkupstools/nut/pull/2013 and seems to not upset CI on any platform, including Windows (which behaves funny WRT binding to the same host:port as many times as you ask). Ultimately the chosen logic is that if there was a `LISTEN * <port>` in `upsd.conf`, the depending on

Thanks to everyone for a fruitful discussion, links and ideas. The result is nearing a merge at https://github.com/networkupstools/nut/pull/2013 and seems to not upset CI on any platform, including Windows (which behaves funny WRT binding to the same host:port as many times as you ask). Ultimately the chosen logic is that if there was a `LISTEN * <port>` in `upsd.conf`, the depending on

According to this bugzilla entry, bug 6870 has been fixed as of at least version 3.5: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6870 However, I assert that it is present in 4.2.10, which ships with Debian Jessie. On my home network (IPv4 and IPv6), a box with Samba 4.2.10 with IPv6 disabled (via sysctl), will fail to contact a DC because the IPv6 connect fails immediately before the v4

Hi, Dear OpenSSH support, I'm writing to ask whether this bug is fixed in your openSSH 6.0. If no, do you have any plan? https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=640857 Regards, Carol

Guys, I'm facing this problem too: https://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/2013-March/172230.html I have two Samba4 AC DC, in both located in my office, dual-stacked, working like a charm. Now, I need to deploy a third DC, located within Amazon EC2, which does NOT have IPv6. But, samba-tool fails to join. How can I workaround this, without enabling a tunneled IPv6 within my EC2 ?

Hello list! When em0 has an inet address while bridge0 doesn't, it seems to be OK: ----- bs1% uname -a FreeBSD bs1.sp34.ru 7.0-STABLE FreeBSD 7.0-STABLE #0: Sun May 25 20:15:26 MSD 2008 root@bs1.sp34.ru:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/BSM i386 bs1% ifconfig em0; ifconfig tap0; ifconfig bridge0 em0: flags=8943<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,PROMISC,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> metric 0 mtu 1500

Hey guys! To make the adoption of IPv6 networks with Samba4 more smooth / robust, I think that it is vital to give to Samba4, the ability for it, to join a IPv4-Only Secondary DC, into a Dual-Stacked Primary DC. This doesn't work today. Otherwise, these days to enable IPv6 within a "Samba4 AC DC" network, it is a requirement to enable it, simultaneously, on each and every network

After upgrade from previous version I can't run rsync. 2004/05/09 10:40:54 [18630] rsyncd version 2.6.2 starting, listening on port 873 2004/05/09 10:40:54 [18630] rsync error: error in socket IO (code 10) at socket.c(466) strace shows that there is problem with listen() I've found patch on this lists: --- rsync-2.6.2/socket.c.orig 2004-05-08 23:25:11.979473336 +0200 +++

Hi list, I just tried to add a second DC to an existing Samba4 domain using samba-tool (both hosts run latest samba4 git version). But the join failed, complaining about being unable to find a writeable DC: root at elektron:~# /opt/samba4/bin/samba-tool domain join linex.r00t.la DC Finding a writeable DC for domain 'linex.r00t.la' ERROR(exception): uncaught exception - Failed to find a

I have been experiencing a problem with using X11 forwarding on an IPv6 enabled host (both CentOS 4.3 and Feddora Core 5 in x86) when X11UseLocalhost is off. Having looked at the code and the previous discussion regarding http://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=164 I think the problem is due to the IPV6_V6ONLY code interacting poorly with the DONT_TRY_OTHER_AF hack. Basically, on current

Currently, if IPv6-enabled rsync is run as --daemon, it will perform a wildcard bind(2) on an AF_INET6 socket and expect that IPv4 traffic will be forwarded to the v6 socket (IPv4 mapped address, RFC2553). This has never worked on OpenBSD which disallows IPv4 mapped addresses for security reasons. On FreeBSD 5.0-CURRENT, where the behavior is subject to configuration, the default was switched to

On Dec 11, 2014, at 3:10 AM, Alexander Dalloz <ad+lists at uni-x.org> wrote: > Am 11.12.2014 um 04:48 schrieb Warren Young: >> >> the stock configuration of Apache only listens for IPv6 connections: > > No, that's just the way it is displayed for apache. In fact the service listens on IPv4 as well (given we speak about the default configuration with `Listen

http://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=164 ------- Additional Comments From yoshfuji at linux-ipv6.org 2002-05-18 09:44 ------- Created an attachment (id=97) Try to set IPV6_V6ONLY if available. Open ::1 and 127.0.0.1 if x11_use_localhost is set. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

Am 26.08.2018 um 18:12 schrieb TE Dukes: > Thanks. I did open the port but made no difference. > > I found this in the roundcube mail error file: > > [26-Aug-2018 11:48:41 -0400]: <a763f95e> IMAP Error: Login failed for tdukes > from 192.168.1.102. Could not connect to localhost:143: > php_network_getaddresses: getaddrinfo failed: System error in >

Hi, So I did some digging into the source code, and I think I've found the issue. Around line 120 of source3/libads/cldap.c: for (i=0; i<num_servers; i++) { NTSTATUS status; status = cldap_socket_init(state->cldap, NULL, /* local_addr */ state->servers[i], &state->cldap[i]); if (tevent_req_nterror(req, status)) { return tevent_req_post(req, ev);

Hey All, In a two node glusterfs setup, with one node down, can't use the second node to mount the volume. I understand this is expected behaviour? Anyway to allow the secondary node to function then replicate what changed to the first (primary) when it's back online? Or should I just go for a third node to allow for this? Also, how safe is it to set the following to none?

openssh 7.6p1-lp150.7.4 on OpenSuse Leap 15 (both server and client) Hi all, first post to list, hopefully on-topic. Haven't found anything on the net, tried to ask at first in OpenSuse forums a while ago (https://forums.opensuse.org/showthread.php/533588-rsnapshot-rsync-massive-performance-decrease) and today opened a bug in OpenSuse's Bugzilla

Hi, You need 3 nodes at least to have quorum enabled. In 2 node setup you need to disable quorum so as to be able to still use the volume when one of the nodes go down. On Mon, Apr 9, 2018, 09:02 TomK <tomkcpr at mdevsys.com> wrote: > Hey All, > > In a two node glusterfs setup, with one node down, can't use the second > node to mount the volume. I understand this is