Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2015 19:18:16 +0200 From: "Godfrey Hamshire" <freebsdlist@compudoc.za.net> To: "FreeBSD Users" <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: bsnmpd and set ip range to access snmpd Message-ID: <09E6484BDC7F4979A42684F2B9C0DA00@workstation>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hello=20 I am trying to get bsnmpd's snmpd.conf to allow access from an number = of ip's or a /29=20 My snmpd.conf is stock standard barring a few changes for security.=20 It works just fine for localhost but I want to add a few ips and no = luck.=20 I googled myself silly but there seems no reference for setting = additional ips to access snmpd for info.=20 Again all help is most appreciated=20 Godfrey From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Feb 22 17:27:18 2015 Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG> Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9AC68C86 for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>; Sun, 22 Feb 2015 17:27:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from cosmo.uchicago.edu (cosmo.uchicago.edu [128.135.52.97]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70344C30 for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>; Sun, 22 Feb 2015 17:27:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: by cosmo.uchicago.edu (Postfix, from userid 48) id 29493CB8CA0; Sun, 22 Feb 2015 11:27:17 -0600 (CST) Received: from 76.193.19.10 (SquirrelMail authenticated user valeri) by cosmo.uchicago.edu with HTTP; Sun, 22 Feb 2015 11:27:17 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: <9984.76.193.19.10.1424626037.squirrel@cosmo.uchicago.edu> In-Reply-To: <20150222104425.GA44573@home.parts-unknown.org> References: <20150221224006.GA5501@home.parts-unknown.org> <09da5ec0816e098badc49432c802dc18@sdf.org> <390c4c0547fc27e91d28872d29aa2e04@sdf.org> <20150222091956.fd1ec914.freebsd@edvax.de> <20150222104425.GA44573@home.parts-unknown.org> Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2015 11:27:17 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: why would I get a segmentation fault on one system but not the other? From: "Valeri Galtsev" <galtsev@kicp.uchicago.edu> To: "David Benfell" <benfell@parts-unknown.org> Reply-To: galtsev@kicp.uchicago.edu User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.8-5.el5.centos.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Importance: Normal Cc: cpet <cpet@sdf.org>, Polytropon <freebsd@edvax.de>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions <freebsd-questions.freebsd.org> List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-questions>, <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/>; List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions>, <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2015 17:27:18 -0000 On Sun, February 22, 2015 4:44 am, David Benfell wrote: > On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 09:19:56AM +0100, Polytropon wrote: >> On Sat, 21 Feb 2015 17:03:50 -0600, cpet wrote: >> > As well as don't use stable on a production box as STABLE doesn't mean >> > what it means. >> >> STABLE means that the API/ABI is stable. Unlike HEAD (CURRENT), >> STABLE still is actually _stable_ in most cases, so it's a valid >> solution for production systems (given that you're prepared well, >> and you know what you're doing). I'm running STABLE on few >> production machines myself (where this is needed), but I usually >> prefer (and often recommend) using RELEASE and add the security >> patches when they are available. >> > Thinking about this more, I'm inclined to think my problem is not with > the base system. I haven't seen *any* crashes with stuff that can be > clearly identified as being in the base system, let alone the kernel. > > My memory test has just completed a 4th pass with zero errors. It's > now been running for 7.5 hours. > > I think my problem is somewhere in the ports. > After you definitely know where the failure source is memory or system/software (e.g. by swapping drives and seeing which system fails after that), and if it turns out to be hardware, I would suggest to try one more thing. Clock down RAM speed just to the next slower setting (you usually can do that in BIOS). If RAM or memory controller is marginally on the edge of their capabilities, stepping down RAM speed may bring them to speeds at which they are reliable (electronics wise you are just going to longer pulses, so front steepness, and delays between different signal line fronts matter less. This solves, e.g. the case when memory controller can marginally not handle too high capacitive load of what is attached to address lines of memory bus). Good luck! Valeri ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?09E6484BDC7F4979A42684F2B9C0DA00>