[gentoo-user] Open RC problem?

[gentoo-user] Open RC problem?

[Peter Humphrey]

Hello list,

Has anyone had problems with sys-apps/openrc-0.18.4? I upgraded to it this 
morning and on rebooting, my md devices were left inactive.

-- 
Rgds
Peter

Re: [gentoo-user] Open RC problem?

[Alan Mackenzie]

Hello, Peter.

On Fri, Dec 04, 2015 at 12:01:48PM +0000, Peter Humphrey wrote:
> Hello list,

> Has anyone had problems with sys-apps/openrc-0.18.4? I upgraded to it this 
> morning and on rebooting, my md devices were left inactive.

I upgraded yesterday, and on rebooting, nothing gave me cause to
remember that upgrade.

A quick cat /proc/mdstat shows that all my md devices are healthy.

Did you upgrade any config files that were needed (none of mine needed
it)?

As a matter of interest, my system is set up so that the kernel
assembles my three /dev/md? devices.  I'm running kernel 4.05.

> -- 
> Rgds
> Peter

-- 
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).

Re: [gentoo-user] Open RC problem?

[Peter Humphrey]

On Friday 04 December 2015 12:19:28 Alan Mackenzie wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 04, 2015 at 12:01:48PM +0000, Peter Humphrey wrote:
> > Has anyone had problems with sys-apps/openrc-0.18.4? I upgraded to it
> > this morning and on rebooting, my md devices were left inactive.
> 
> I upgraded yesterday, and on rebooting, nothing gave me cause to
> remember that upgrade.
> 
> A quick cat /proc/mdstat shows that all my md devices are healthy.
> 
> Did you upgrade any config files that were needed (none of mine needed
> it)?

Nope.

> As a matter of interest, my system is set up so that the kernel
> assembles my three /dev/md? devices.  I'm running kernel 4.05.

Thanks for the reply, Alan. I did some more poking around and found that 
removing zerotier-one and netmount from the default run-level fixed it. Or 
maybe it was just coincidence again - this box certainly does some odd 
things at times.

That zerotier thing was an attempt at linking to my mobile phone, but it's 
no longer interfering now. I never did quite manage to get it working 
anyway.

-- 
Rgds
Peter

Re: [gentoo-user] Open RC problem?

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 830 bytes --]

On Fri, 04 Dec 2015 17:05:49 +0000, Peter Humphrey wrote:

> Thanks for the reply, Alan. I did some more poking around and found
> that removing zerotier-one and netmount from the default run-level
> fixed it. Or maybe it was just coincidence again - this box certainly
> does some odd things at times.

Unlikely, because the RAID stuff is started in the boot runlevel,
whereas zerotier-one is in the default runlevel.
 
> That zerotier thing was an attempt at linking to my mobile phone, but
> it's no longer interfering now. I never did quite manage to get it
> working anyway.

I discovered zerotier-one some months ago and wouldn't be without it now,
especially when they released an Android client. What problems did you
have?


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Where do forest rangers go to "get away from it all?"

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 181 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Open RC problem?

[Peter Humphrey]

On Friday 04 December 2015 22:11:50 Neil Bothwick wrote:

> I discovered zerotier-one some months ago and wouldn't be without it now,
> especially when they released an Android client. What problems did you
> have?

I think I had an understanding gap in setting it up on the Android device. 
And I found it was only good for file transfers, which I don't need much.

-- 
Rgds
Peter

Re: [gentoo-user] Open RC problem?

[Peter Humphrey]

On Friday 04 December 2015 22:11:50 Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Fri, 04 Dec 2015 17:05:49 +0000, Peter Humphrey wrote:
> > Thanks for the reply, Alan. I did some more poking around and found
> > that removing zerotier-one and netmount from the default run-level
> > fixed it. Or maybe it was just coincidence again - this box certainly
> > does some odd things at times.
> 
> Unlikely, because the RAID stuff is started in the boot runlevel,
> whereas zerotier-one is in the default runlevel.

Yes, I know. I'm clutching at straws here. I think this motherboard must 
have some kind of timing difficulty with my SSDs.

-- 
Rgds
Peter

Re: [gentoo-user] Open RC problem?

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 673 bytes --]

On Sat, 05 Dec 2015 09:44:07 +0000, Peter Humphrey wrote:

> > I discovered zerotier-one some months ago and wouldn't be without it
> > now, especially when they released an Android client. What problems
> > did you have?  
> 
> I think I had an understanding gap in setting it up on the Android
> device. And I found it was only good for file transfers, which I don't
> need much.

I can't think how you set it up wrong. AFAIR I only gave it the network
ID to join and off it went. I use it for all sorts of stuff from my
phone, the only notable exception being file transfers...


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Half of being smart is knowing what you're dumb at.

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 181 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Open RC problem?

[Peter Humphrey]

On Saturday 05 December 2015 10:18:01 Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Sat, 05 Dec 2015 09:44:07 +0000, Peter Humphrey wrote:
> > > I discovered zerotier-one some months ago and wouldn't be without it
> > > now, especially when they released an Android client. What problems
> > > did you have?
> > 
> > I think I had an understanding gap in setting it up on the Android
> > device. And I found it was only good for file transfers, which I don't
> > need much.
> 
> I can't think how you set it up wrong. AFAIR I only gave it the network
> ID to join and off it went. I use it for all sorts of stuff from my
> phone, the only notable exception being file transfers...

Maybe it's time to have another look at it. Thanks for the encouragement.

-- 
Rgds
Peter

[gentoo-user] Re: Open RC problem?

[Remy Blank]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 963 bytes --]

Neil Bothwick wrote on 2015-12-04 23:11:
> On Fri, 04 Dec 2015 17:05:49 +0000, Peter Humphrey wrote:
> 
>> Thanks for the reply, Alan. I did some more poking around and found
>> that removing zerotier-one and netmount from the default run-level
>> fixed it. Or maybe it was just coincidence again - this box certainly
>> does some odd things at times.
> 
> Unlikely, because the RAID stuff is started in the boot runlevel,
> whereas zerotier-one is in the default runlevel.
>  
>> That zerotier thing was an attempt at linking to my mobile phone, but
>> it's no longer interfering now. I never did quite manage to get it
>> working anyway.
> 
> I discovered zerotier-one some months ago and wouldn't be without it now,
> especially when they released an Android client. What problems did you
> have?

zerotier looks awesome. Do you have an ebuild for it? A quick search
didn't return any results. Do you run your own controller?

-- Remy


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 181 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Open RC problem?

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 628 bytes --]

On Sat, 5 Dec 2015 14:47:28 +0100, Remy Blank wrote:

> > I discovered zerotier-one some months ago and wouldn't be without it
> > now, especially when they released an Android client. What problems
> > did you have?  
> 
> zerotier looks awesome. Do you have an ebuild for it? A quick search
> didn't return any results. Do you run your own controller?

No, I use the generic Linux installer from their web site, and use
changedetection.com to keep me informed of updates. No, I don't run my
own controller. An ebuild would be handy for that.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

RAM disk is *not* an installation procedure.

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 181 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Open RC problem?

[Mick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 750 bytes --]

On Saturday 05 Dec 2015 13:55:32 Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Sat, 5 Dec 2015 14:47:28 +0100, Remy Blank wrote:
> > > I discovered zerotier-one some months ago and wouldn't be without it
> > > now, especially when they released an Android client. What problems
> > > did you have?
> > 
> > zerotier looks awesome. Do you have an ebuild for it? A quick search
> > didn't return any results. Do you run your own controller?
> 
> No, I use the generic Linux installer from their web site, and use
> changedetection.com to keep me informed of updates. No, I don't run my
> own controller. An ebuild would be handy for that.

Neil, could you please spare a couple of words to explain how the zerotier 
architecture works?
-- 
Regards,
Mick

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 473 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Open RC problem?

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1280 bytes --]

On Sat, 5 Dec 2015 14:13:00 +0000, Mick wrote:

> Neil, could you please spare a couple of words to explain how the
> zerotier architecture works?

I can do it in one word - magic!

It's basically a P2P VPN. You set up a network on the controller and then
join it from various machines. Those machines register with the network
controller, and receive an IP address from it, but the actual
communication is direct between the computers. So your data is private
and if both computers are on the same LAN, you still get full LAN speed
between them.

It use a TUN/TAP interface, for example on this laptop:

zt0: flags=4163<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST>  mtu 2800
        inet 10.252.252.6  netmask 255.255.255.0  broadcast 10.252.252.255
        ether 46:96:8c:9c:02:e1  txqueuelen 500  (Ethernet)

So I can connect to 10.252.252.6 from any computer on my zerotier
network, but you cannot. You may even have the same IP address for one of
the computers on your network.

It's open source and if you want optimum security, or want to run a
network of more than 10 computers without paying a fee, you can run your
own controller.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Format: (v.) to erase irrevocably and unintentionally.
        (n.) The process of such erasure.

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 181 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Open RC problem?

[Mick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 1570 bytes --]



On Saturday 05 Dec 2015 14:31:57 Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Sat, 5 Dec 2015 14:13:00 +0000, Mick wrote:
> > Neil, could you please spare a couple of words to explain how the
> > zerotier architecture works?
> 
> I can do it in one word - magic!

:-)


> It's basically a P2P VPN. You set up a network on the controller and then
> join it from various machines. Those machines register with the network
> controller, and receive an IP address from it, but the actual
> communication is direct between the computers. So your data is private
> and if both computers are on the same LAN, you still get full LAN speed
> between them.
> 
> It use a TUN/TAP interface, for example on this laptop:
> 
> zt0: flags=4163<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST>  mtu 2800
>         inet 10.252.252.6  netmask 255.255.255.0  broadcast 10.252.252.255
>         ether 46:96:8c:9c:02:e1  txqueuelen 500  (Ethernet)

So is this a userspace tunnel implementation, with the controller playing the 
role of a remote VPN gateway?  Like OpenVPN?  What encryption does it use?
 

> So I can connect to 10.252.252.6 from any computer on my zerotier
> network, but you cannot. You may even have the same IP address for one of
> the computers on your network.
> 
> It's open source and if you want optimum security, or want to run a
> network of more than 10 computers without paying a fee, you can run your
> own controller.

Wouldn't IPSec be more preferable?  I'm trying to understand the benefit/need 
for yet another tunneling solution.
-- 
Regards,
Mick

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 473 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Open RC problem?

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2242 bytes --]

On Sat, 5 Dec 2015 18:49:16 +0000, Mick wrote:

> > It's basically a P2P VPN. You set up a network on the controller and
> > then join it from various machines. Those machines register with the
> > network controller, and receive an IP address from it, but the actual
> > communication is direct between the computers. So your data is private
> > and if both computers are on the same LAN, you still get full LAN
> > speed between them.
> > 
> > It use a TUN/TAP interface, for example on this laptop:
> > 
> > zt0: flags=4163<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST>  mtu 2800
> >         inet 10.252.252.6  netmask 255.255.255.0  broadcast
> > 10.252.252.255 ether 46:96:8c:9c:02:e1  txqueuelen 500  (Ethernet)  
> 
> So is this a userspace tunnel implementation, with the controller
> playing the role of a remote VPN gateway?  Like OpenVPN?

The controller is not a gateway, it is only used to connect the computers
initially. It's more like a bittorrent tracker or DNS server, it
facilitates the connection but doesn't see any of it.

> What encryption does it use?

From https://www.zerotier.com/tech_faq.shtml

ZeroTier currently uses 256-bit Curve25519 elliptic curve Diffie-Hellman
for shared key agreement and Ed25519 for elliptic curve signatures.
256-bit Salsa20 with Poly1305 authentication is used to encrypt traffic
in transit. The construction and use of these algorithms is identical to
the well-regarded NaCl cryptographic library. 

> > So I can connect to 10.252.252.6 from anycomputer on my zerotier
> > network, but you cannot. You may even have the same IP address for
> > one of the computers on your network.
> > 
> > It's open source and if you want optimum security, or want to run a
> > network of more than 10 computers without paying a fee, you can run
> > your own controller.  
> 
> Wouldn't IPSec be more preferable?  I'm trying to understand the
> benefit/need for yet another tunneling solution.

Ease of use and maintenance and flexibility. Creating a network takes
seconds, adding a client takes a few more, and you can use it all the
time, even if you are already connected to your physical network.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Top Oxymorons Number 39: Almost exactly

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 181 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Open RC problem?

[Mick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 2773 bytes --]

On Sunday 06 Dec 2015 09:24:51 Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Sat, 5 Dec 2015 18:49:16 +0000, Mick wrote:
> > > It's basically a P2P VPN. You set up a network on the controller and
> > > then join it from various machines. Those machines register with the
> > > network controller, and receive an IP address from it, but the actual
> > > communication is direct between the computers. So your data is private
> > > and if both computers are on the same LAN, you still get full LAN
> > > speed between them.
> > > 
> > > It use a TUN/TAP interface, for example on this laptop:
> > > 
> > > zt0: flags=4163<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST>  mtu 2800
> > > 
> > >         inet 10.252.252.6  netmask 255.255.255.0  broadcast
> > > 
> > > 10.252.252.255 ether 46:96:8c:9c:02:e1  txqueuelen 500  (Ethernet)
> > 
> > So is this a userspace tunnel implementation, with the controller
> > playing the role of a remote VPN gateway?  Like OpenVPN?
> 
> The controller is not a gateway, it is only used to connect the computers
> initially. It's more like a bittorrent tracker or DNS server, it
> facilitates the connection but doesn't see any of it.
> 
> > What encryption does it use?
> 
> From https://www.zerotier.com/tech_faq.shtml
> 
> ZeroTier currently uses 256-bit Curve25519 elliptic curve Diffie-Hellman
> for shared key agreement and Ed25519 for elliptic curve signatures.
> 256-bit Salsa20 with Poly1305 authentication is used to encrypt traffic
> in transit. The construction and use of these algorithms is identical to
> the well-regarded NaCl cryptographic library.
> 
> > > So I can connect to 10.252.252.6 from anycomputer on my zerotier
> > > network, but you cannot. You may even have the same IP address for
> > > one of the computers on your network.
> > > 
> > > It's open source and if you want optimum security, or want to run a
> > > network of more than 10 computers without paying a fee, you can run
> > > your own controller.
> > 
> > Wouldn't IPSec be more preferable?  I'm trying to understand the
> > benefit/need for yet another tunneling solution.
> 
> Ease of use and maintenance and flexibility. Creating a network takes
> seconds, adding a client takes a few more, and you can use it all the
> time, even if you are already connected to your physical network.

Thank you Neil!  I couldn't find the FAQ page when I had a cursory look at the 
beginning.  This looks like a very flexible and quite secure option for 
tunnelling connections, especially as they plan to implement PFS in the near 
future.  From what I read here I am not sure if the initial generation of each 
device's keys can be controlled by the end user, but even so zerotier still 
has a good security model.

-- 
Regards,
Mick

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 473 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Open RC problem?

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 698 bytes --]

On Sun, 6 Dec 2015 10:03:46 +0000, Mick wrote:

> Thank you Neil!  I couldn't find the FAQ page when I had a cursory look
> at the beginning.  This looks like a very flexible and quite secure
> option for tunnelling connections, especially as they plan to implement
> PFS in the near future.  From what I read here I am not sure if the
> initial generation of each device's keys can be controlled by the end
> user, but even so zerotier still has a good security model.

I don't think it can. But if you were that concerned about its security,
you'd be running your own controller anyway.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Voting Democrat or Republican is like choosing a cabin in the Titanic.

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 181 bytes --]