[01:47] *** KDE_Perr1 is now known as KDE_Perry [01:56] Is anyone aware of a reason why my ISP-provided wireless router (192.168.254.254) would be showing up in the HTTP access log of a computer on the LAN? The request to / is every 1-2 minutes [03:17] hmm irc is lagging a LOT [03:18] and then it's fine again [04:43] http://hackaday.com/2015/08/31/fcc-introduces-rules-banning-wifi-router-firmware-modification/ [04:43] i wonder how that will play out [04:43] it may mean linux is illegal on routers? [04:43] well until firmware blobs are built into wireless cards. [04:44] oh, it's still proposal [04:44] that made it look final [04:47] https://apps.fcc.gov/kdb/GetAttachment.html?id=1UiSJRK869RsyQddPi5hpw%3D%3D&desc=594280%20D02%20U-NII%20Device%20Security%20v01r02&tracking_number=39498 [04:47] erk sounds like it is law already [07:17] no, i think its still in proposal phase, comments link to a request for comments on the "proposal" [07:18] https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2015/08/06/2015-18402/equipment-authorization-and-electronic-labeling-for-wireless-devices [07:18] This document has a comment period that ends in 7 days (09/08/2015) [08:48] well, it seems like they're not banning linux on routers but banning modification of wlan radios [08:48] makes sense considering how often people use other countries' regulatory domain to configure power levels beyond allowable limits [08:49] oh well [08:54] can't be bothered to care about it [10:04] Right it doesn't ban Linux, but does make open-source drivers more difficult. We'll see a return to the Atheros "HAL" style I guess. [10:53] yep, probably [12:02] milki: yeh it got extended it looks like [12:03] cos deadlines forcomments were 16th august [12:03] and there are comments since then [12:04] i wonder what fsf has tos ay about that heh [12:05] i don't really see how controlling this stuff is meanet to work [12:05] what if i take my cellphone to the US? [12:05] what about laptop or old device [12:06] it seems better to me if they just be proactive with dealing with infringers. [12:36] *** pjs has quit IRC (*.net *.split) [12:36] *** eryc has quit IRC (*.net *.split) [12:36] *** tellnes has quit IRC (*.net *.split) [12:36] *** mjp_ has quit IRC (*.net *.split) [12:36] *** trobotham has quit IRC (*.net *.split) [12:37] *** tellnes has joined #arpnetworks [12:37] *** mjp_ has joined #arpnetworks [12:37] *** pjs has joined #arpnetworks [12:37] *** eryc has joined #arpnetworks [12:39] Does anyone have experience with a DSL router making HTTP requests for "/" to IPs on the LAN every 1-2 minutes? [12:40] I've only noticed it after setting up a web server on the private LAN [12:42] *** trobotham has joined #arpnetworks [12:47] mercutio: how on earth would they address people misusing low power unlicensed radio spectrum? [12:48] m0unds: the same way they do now [12:49] haha, okay [12:49] they'd listen for radio interference and move closer to the source [12:49] right, and it would require them to sit in a truck looking for people infringing on unlicensed stuff [12:49] vs just making it harder to abuse it [12:49] if it was licensed stuff and high power transmission, that'd be one thing [12:49] yeah well usually it's in response to complaints from things like weather radar stuff [12:50] but when the unlicensed bands include things like xbox controllers, wireless mice, etc, it's a little harder to deal with [12:50] that stuff is 2.4 ghz normally [12:50] *** pjs has quit IRC (*.net *.split) [12:50] *** eryc has quit IRC (*.net *.split) [12:50] it's 5ish ghz stuff they're cracking down on [12:51] right, but it's still a cesspool [12:51] i'm not sure it's indoors stuff they're relaly trying to deal with though [12:51] and there still was nowhere near enough spectrum allocated for unlicensed stuff [12:51] so much as stuff that goes outdoors too [12:51] new zealand's just allocated more unlicensed spectrum [12:51] yes, lots of shitty WISPs use unlicensed 5ghz [12:51] and it's a mess [12:51] like 3 ghz or something [12:52] yeah wisp's will be able to use 3 ghz here now too [12:52] i can't remember the exact frequency [12:52] maybe it is 3ghz [12:52] cos fcc say they may add 3 ghz too [12:52] oh fcc say they may hadd 3.65 to 3.7 ghz [12:53] for wisp type stuff i think licensed spectrum is a good idea [12:53] and that the cost of doing licensed should be minimised. [12:55] *** pjs has joined #arpnetworks [12:55] *** eryc has joined #arpnetworks [13:05] so long as the licensed gear is more expensive and the licensing cost is >$0, most of the shitty wisps i'm thinking of would probably stick to unlicensed stuff [13:10] So a call to the ISP who has provided the DSL/wifi router yielded no clue unsurprisingly [13:12] Time to write a custom pf ruleset for LAN usage! [13:19] i've heard of attacks on routers from web sites that try to pull stuff off local network to exploit [13:25] kellytk: what's the mfgr of the router/modem thing? [13:27] Netgear [13:28] mercutio: I had two ideas, either the router was configured to monitor customers to prevent services being ran (unlikely and better controlled from the upstream) and secondly some shenanigans afoot [13:29] Either way, it's a gross display [13:31] windows often shows names of routers, maybe related. [13:31] Thank you [13:34] yea, was thinking discovery of some sort [13:35] http://blog.multipath-tcp.org/blog/html/2015/07/24/korea.html [13:35] that's actually kind of cool [13:37] It reminds me of modem shotgunning from days of yore [13:37] Nice link, thanks mercutio [13:37] now i am curious to try this on wireless heh [13:38] it's a pity have to use two wireless cards to hit two routers. [14:31] *** jpalmer has joined #arpnetworks [14:31] *** jpalmer_ has joined #arpnetworks [14:49] mercutio, someone else told me it bodged their bootloader back to windows too [14:49] i am using uefi [14:49] maybe 'cause these last two were windows default (one 7 one 8), then resized and linux..... ah [14:50] one is UEFI type (does secure boot etc), other is just BIOS [14:51] hmmm... [14:52] i've tried forcing androids (back in 2.x days) to try stay on 3G when on WIFI and load balance [14:54] i think the radio status change on android causes it to wipe out your default route for data [14:54] at least that was how it was the last time i looked at it [14:54] wifi takes preference over viable carrier data [14:55] i think adb dumpstate connectivity will give you an idea of how the device sees it [14:57] http://arstechnica.co.uk/information-technology/2015/09/microsoft-accused-of-adding-spy-features-to-windows-7-8/ [14:57] the plot thickens. [14:57] i'm kind of over it tbh [15:00] i might try going back to linux fill time [15:00] go for it [15:00] err full [15:00] had video driver issues in the past [15:00] but maybe it's better now [15:01] doubt it, but that's the pessimist in me [15:01] heh [15:01] does radeon do good at spinning fans down? [15:01] that was my main annoyance [15:01] no idea [15:01] my full time linux box has fanless video card to fix it :) [15:01] i don't use linux on the desktop because i don't have patience to fix stuff [15:04] for me it's mostly cos games and web browsing work better on windows [15:08] It did not botch my MBR dual-boot, fwiw. [15:08] (re: Win10) [15:17] yeah they seemed to get better with mbr [15:44] All my UEFI installs of Win10 were standalone, so I can't comment on that :p [15:56] well it just removes the uefi boot option [15:56] you can add the uefi back in. with windows it seems that it can be detected? [15:56] with linux it seems you have to add. so it may be i'm doing something wrong. [15:56] like - if i stick a ssd in a different computer with uefi it won't just boot [15:57] i need to add boot option in [15:57] have you done uefi installs with arch? [15:57] Right. But that's by design [15:57] Yes I have,several times [15:57] and it goes away if you move ssd to a different computer giht? [15:57] right [15:57] and you need to boot off stick and put it back in [15:57] Some OS work around that "limitation" by installing their bootloader to the default shellx64.efi location [15:58] oh [15:58] i suppose i could install shellx64.efi [15:58] It's a dirty hack, but an effective one all the same. [15:58] and get a shell then [15:58] that's good enough to fix it :) [15:58] You could. or just copy grub.efi to shellx64.efi :P [15:58] heh [15:58] (There's a grub-install switch to install as shellx64.efi in fact) [15:58] sweet [15:58] yeh could do that [15:59] i'm wondering if i should even still use grub [15:59] but i suppose it works [15:59] thinking about trying the linux create uefi stub thingy [15:59] and avoid the whole bootloader thing completely [15:59] and just select boot device by pressing f12 or whatever [15:59] Personally I recommend refind [16:00] mercutio: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/GRUB#UEFI_firmware_workaround it's bootx64 not shellx64 apparently [16:00] yeh i probably should have checked arch linux wiki [16:00] i keep forgetting that it's good [16:00] lolol [16:01] been using linux so long i'm used to finding it hard to find good answers [16:01] (no that doesn't mention the grub-install switch. And maybe I was even thinking of refind having such a switch) [16:01] oh that's stated as a workaround [16:01] not to fix the disappearing if moving to different computer issue [16:02] "grub-install automatically tries to create a menu entry in the boot manager." [16:02] so yeah that's the primary issue [16:02] i.e. it calls to efibootmgr [16:02] because that's per system not per hard-disk [16:02] and i like the freedom to move ssd/hard-disk between machines [16:03] (and for windows to not screw with the boot list) [16:05] hmm maybe i can install shell straight from windows [16:08] shellx64? You should be able to, just copy into place... [16:08] not on windows [16:08] windows doesn't mount it as a drive [16:08] More of an issue getting to it in the first place [16:08] So... mount it as a drive? (Assign it a letter) [16:09] i dunno if that works [16:09] yeah you can't [16:10] oh looks like there may be a way [16:11] woot, mountvol b: /s [16:48] are we mounting zfs partitions on windows as a drive? [16:49] how would you do that? [16:49] I didnt think it was possible [16:49] i'm trying to boot efi shell :( [16:49] oh ok [16:50] "launch efi shell from filesystem device" - "not found" [17:08] i gave up and used usb stick [17:13] seem to be capped at 24 gigabit for network speed for some reason [17:13] still a lot better than the 8 gigabit i'm getting out of windows [17:47] even linux to linux i'm still getting synergy issues in one direction [17:48] maybe it was linux that was to blame [17:51] https://github.com/synergy/synergy/issues/4735 [17:51] it's not just me, apparently lots of combinations can't paste from client to server [18:27] On October 15, SoftLayer will change the reverse DNS addresses for servers on our network from xxx.reverse.softlayer.com to xxx.softlayer-reverse.com. If you have hard-coded your servers' default SoftLayer reverse DNS entries in any of your applications or systems, your code will need to be updated to reflect the new reverse DNS entries. [18:28] is it just me or does softlayer-reverse.com not seem to be a registered domain [18:29] lol : YES! YOUR DOMAIN IS AVAILABLE. BUY IT BEFORE SOMEONE ELSE DOES. [18:30] up_the_irons: I was wondering when the invoice would show up [18:47] wow [18:47] i think you're right mnathani [18:48] although i still think it's pretty rude ;) [18:48] you could just email them abou it [18:51] lol let's register it ;) [18:52] Haa! [18:55] :-) [18:58] hahaha [18:58] resisting the urge [18:59] "block in on em0: 199.249.120.1 > 192.168.254.100: ip-proto-17" [19:03] What is "ip-proto-17"? [19:04] @google protocol 17 [19:04] 32,600,000 total results returned for 'protocol 17', here's 3 [19:04] List of IP protocol numbers - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_IP_protocol_numbers) 23, 0x17, TRUNK-1, Trunk-1. 24, 0x18, TRUNK-2, Trunk-2. 25, 0x19, LEAF-1, Leaf-1. 26, 0x1A, LEAF-2, Leaf-2. 27, 0x1B, RDP, Reliable Datagram Protocol ... [19:04] Protocol Numbers (http://www.iana.org/assignments/protocol-numbers) Aug 25, 2015 ... In the Internet Protocol version 4 (IPv4) [RFC791] there is a field called "Protocol" to identify ... 17, UDP, User Datagram, [RFC768][Jon_Postel]. [19:04] User Datagram Protocol - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_Datagram_Protocol) The User Datagram Protocol (UDP) is one of the core members of the Internet .... The protocol is that for UDP (see List of IP protocol numbers): 17 (0x11). [19:04] I searched before asking of course. There's surprisingly little info. It seems related to fragmented packets/DDoS [19:04] udp. [19:05] It's coming from only one, two max hosts though [19:06] ip protocol is udp [19:06] what udp traffic is it [19:06] er 17 [19:06] figure out what traffic it is using wireshark or something and maybe you can figure out what specifically it is [19:06] otherwise, it's just...udp [19:08] UDP is a refreshingly short RFC. [19:08] yes [19:08] i like udp [19:30] receiving random udp packets is pretty common [19:36] http://pastebin.com/thYvsH6H [19:36] 30 and 258 [19:38] uhh [19:39] that's dns [19:39] at least the udp i can be bothered to look at [19:52] haha, friend sent me a link to some "avoid people" site that looks for places on foursquare or whatever that nobody checks into [19:53] most of the ones within 10 mins of my house are other people's houses. guess they added them to check in to and then stopped or never did [20:49] Nice app idea [20:50] terrible app idea i reckon :) [20:51] it promotes less popular places to make them popular [20:51] even if that's some random guys house. [20:52] are people generally using gpt with freebsd these days? [20:52] as opposed to bsd disk slices [20:53] with zfs i suppose you don't even notice which it is [20:53] Well, yes I see your point. What would cause a ping to the router to result in "64 bytes from 192.168.254.254: icmp_seq=5 ttl=64 time=2.213 ms (DUP!)"? I've not seen DUP! before [20:54] i've seen dup heaps of times [20:54] That's what she said!! [20:54] I use GPT however I only run VPSs at present, so ZFS isn't an option [20:54] it means you're receiving the same ping data back in a packet that's already been received [20:54] What would cause that? [20:54] switch loop is an easy way to create it [20:55] but with your router it may be something silly like pinging broadcast address [20:57] One virtual server can ping the router IP with no issues, the other gives the DUP! message. They are both running the same pf.conf ruleset [20:58] it could also be due to inprecise clock [20:58] it may be that the mac is the same on both the vm's [20:58] and it's sending data two both vm's [20:59] or it may be because you're pinging both at once [21:00] I've verified their MACs differ [21:07] try pinging the host then [21:07] What? [21:20] This is such a strange issue. I thought it was caused by bringing up pf, but it's not [21:20] Even when I stop pf, the DUP! issue remains [21:27] What's strange is the guest which gets the DUP! only gets that for pinging the router, none of the other computers on the LAN [21:28] Interesting, DUP! is also caused by pinging google.com [21:33] It may have started when I changed my host system to use a static IP vs the router's DHCP [21:56] Can anyone see any obvious problems with the pf.conf ruleset http://pastebin.com/TkYyTrMc freebsd-update fetch is failing [21:56] With the pf service stopped, the fetch functions correctly [22:12] I assumed allowing out on 80 would allow in for the same connection, apparently both out and in 80 needed to be allowed [22:57] I figured out the DUP! issue mercutio. I need to restart Parallels after changing my workstation's IP to static from DHCP