From mikemol at gmail.com Thu Apr 2 10:42:42 2015 From: mikemol at gmail.com (Michael Mol) Date: Thu, 02 Apr 2015 14:42:42 +0000 Subject: [GRLUG] Friday After Five Cancelled again this week. Message-ID: Have a pleasant Easter weekend, and see you all next week! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mikemol at gmail.com Thu Apr 9 13:07:17 2015 From: mikemol at gmail.com (Michael Mol) Date: Thu, 09 Apr 2015 17:07:17 +0000 Subject: [GRLUG] Friday After Five Message-ID: We here at Virtual Interconnect are hosting the Grand Rapids Linux User's Group for weekly socials. Kyle and myself serve as anchors; at least one of us will be here during the event. This week, I expect both of us to be there. A reminder: if you have any questions about this event, feel free to join us on our IRC channel - #grlug on FreeNode. Time: 5PM-7PM Fridays, every week unless cancelled Location: 315 Richard Terrace, Grand Rapids MI 49506 (Not handicapped-accessible, sorry.) Google Street View: http://goo.gl/maps/CDOzO Commute: Parking is on the south side of the building, and The #6 bus route runs right in front of us, the #5 and #19 come close. Nearest stops: http://bit.ly/1HRPhz8 Food: Popcorn and water are free. Just about anything else is BYOB (No alcohol). There will be pizza, and contributions toward the pizza fund are appreciated. Entry: The door is always locked, unless it's propped open. Ring the doorbell if it's shut. Loitering: When we have to go, we have to go. There are restaurants, cafes and bookstores all around, though. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lvl at omnitec.net Tue Apr 14 15:57:49 2015 From: lvl at omnitec.net (L. V. Lammert) Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2015 14:57:49 -0500 (CDT) Subject: [GRLUG] Xenserver Message-ID: Normally we use SuSE & Xen for virtualization in the lab, but one of our chaps is pushing XenServer and I'm trying to grok it. What is 'best philosophy' on configuring RAID on a single host? With an OS based Xen, we would create softRAID and then partition on top of that, but it from the XenServer docs I have seen that XenServer prefers LVM? If so, what would be a good topology? Thanks! Lee From kyle at virtualinterconnect.com Thu Apr 16 13:24:33 2015 From: kyle at virtualinterconnect.com (Kyle Maas) Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2015 13:24:33 -0400 Subject: [GRLUG] No Friday After Five this week (April 17th) Message-ID: <552FF051.8080004@virtualinterconnect.com> So, yeah, no FAF this week. Have a nice weekend! Warm Regards, Kyle Maas From lvl at omnitec.net Tue Apr 21 16:29:36 2015 From: lvl at omnitec.net (L. V. Lammert) Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2015 15:29:36 -0500 (CDT) Subject: [GRLUG] Sound Message-ID: Need to make a presentation tonight with HDMI & sound; figured out how to install PulseAudioPanel, and it shows sound playing. Unfortunately, the HDMI audio device, even though it shows in aplay -L: $ aplay -L null Discard all samples (playback) or generate zero samples (capture) pulse PulseAudio Sound Server hdmi:CARD=HDMI,DEV=0 HDA ATI HDMI, HDMI 0 HDMI Audio Output default:CARD=Generic HD-Audio Generic, 92HD91BXX Analog Default Audio Device sysdefault:CARD=Generic HD-Audio Generic, 92HD91BXX Analog Default Audio Device Still shows "HDMI DisplayPort (unplugged)", even though video is fine. Don't suppose anyone has worked through this before? Why would PulseAudio think the HDMI is unplugged even thought it is working? TIA! Lee From mikemol at gmail.com Wed Apr 22 15:39:28 2015 From: mikemol at gmail.com (Michael Mol) Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2015 19:39:28 +0000 Subject: [GRLUG] No Friday After Five this week Message-ID: I've got family coming over Friday evening, and Kyle's out of town, so no FAF this week. Looking forward to next week! (Also, Jamie, hoping to see you the next time we have a Friday After Five. My brother needs a python guy with some embedded dev experience for a hobby project he's working on. :) ) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lvl at omnitec.net Thu Apr 23 11:47:14 2015 From: lvl at omnitec.net (L. V. Lammert) Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2015 10:47:14 -0500 (CDT) Subject: [GRLUG] SMTP reverse DNS validation Message-ID: Ran into an interesting situation recently - the reverse DNS entry for the SMTP server listed on the MX record was missing the ".com", and was therefore be rejected by an email server that checks reverse DNS. I was going to send their IT chap a report from MXToolbox showing this error, but MXToobox did not show the error because the VPS hostname was ALSO listed on the reverse DNS and IT was valid. Has anyone used a testing service that will actually show validity of the reverse DNS (i.e. test for the name match)? I would really like to be able to show them the problem, but the issue with MxToobox means that is not usable. TIA! Lee From mfarver at mindbent.org Thu Apr 23 11:52:28 2015 From: mfarver at mindbent.org (Mark Farver) Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2015 11:52:28 -0400 Subject: [GRLUG] SMTP reverse DNS validation In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Not sure what you are saying...did you get more than one result to a PTR lookup? Can you paste dig output displaying the condition? Requiring anything beyond the existence of a PTR record on an incoming message is problematic. You can certainly give positive score to a machine with valid and identical forward and reverse records but many legitimate senders will not have that. Mark On Apr 23, 2015 11:47 AM, "L. V. Lammert" wrote: > Ran into an interesting situation recently - the reverse DNS entry for the > SMTP server listed on the MX record was missing the ".com", and was > therefore be rejected by an email server that checks reverse DNS. > > I was going to send their IT chap a report from MXToolbox showing this > error, but MXToobox did not show the error because the VPS hostname was > ALSO listed on the reverse DNS and IT was valid. > > Has anyone used a testing service that will actually show validity of the > reverse DNS (i.e. test for the name match)? I would really like to be able > to show them the problem, but the issue with MxToobox means that is not > usable. > > TIA! > > Lee > _______________________________________________ > grlug mailing list > grlug at grlug.org > http://shinobu.grlug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/grlug > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lvl at omnitec.net Thu Apr 23 12:14:36 2015 From: lvl at omnitec.net (L. V. Lammert) Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2015 11:14:36 -0500 (CDT) Subject: [GRLUG] SMTP reverse DNS validation In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 23 Apr 2015, Mark Farver wrote: > Not sure what you are saying...did you get more than one result to a PTR > lookup? Can you paste dig output displaying the condition? > MX crownpack.com. 2841 IN MX 10 cpbsvf01.crownpack.com. ;; ADDITIONAL SECTION: cpbsvf01.crownpack.com. 2841 IN A 67.221.227.25 ;; ANSWER SECTION: 25.227.221.67.in-addr.arpa. 3600 IN PTR cpbsvf01.crownpack. 25.227.221.67.in-addr.arpa. 3600 IN PTR 67-221-227-25.xiolink.com. > Requiring anything beyond the existence of a PTR record on an incoming > message is problematic. You can certainly give positive score to a machine > with valid and identical forward and reverse records but many legitimate > senders will not have that. > They may be a legitimate sender, .. but an invalid reverse DNS PTR does indicate they may *not* be legitimate and our email servers are configured to reject. The problem is that MXToobox only checks for the existance of a PTR record and does not match the hostname. I have since found a way to accurately show the discrepancy: http://www.debouncer.com/reverse-dns-check TFTR! Lee -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ grlug mailing list grlug at grlug.org http://shinobu.grlug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/grlug From megadave at gmail.com Thu Apr 23 12:28:09 2015 From: megadave at gmail.com (Dave Chiodo) Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2015 12:28:09 -0400 Subject: [GRLUG] SMTP reverse DNS validation In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Its less about what the MX record, that it is about whatever server the SMTP connection is originating from. (Some email services use one set of servers as MX for receiving INbound mail, and a completely different set of servers for sending OUTbound mail) The verification starts with getting the PTR for the IP address. Then, looking up A records for whatever name(s) are returned from the PTR record. In this case, NEITHER of the names given for the PTR record have an A record. The one missing the ".com" is of course invalid, and there is NO A record for the other: $ dig 67-221-227-25.xiolink.com ;; Got answer: ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NXDOMAIN, id: 10651 On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 12:14 PM, L. V. Lammert wrote: > On Thu, 23 Apr 2015, Mark Farver wrote: > >> Not sure what you are saying...did you get more than one result to a PTR >> lookup? Can you paste dig output displaying the condition? >> > MX > crownpack.com. 2841 IN MX 10 cpbsvf01.crownpack.com. > > ;; ADDITIONAL SECTION: > cpbsvf01.crownpack.com. 2841 IN A 67.221.227.25 > > ;; ANSWER SECTION: > 25.227.221.67.in-addr.arpa. 3600 IN PTR cpbsvf01.crownpack. > 25.227.221.67.in-addr.arpa. 3600 IN PTR 67-221-227-25.xiolink.com. > >> Requiring anything beyond the existence of a PTR record on an incoming >> message is problematic. You can certainly give positive score to a machine >> with valid and identical forward and reverse records but many legitimate >> senders will not have that. >> > They may be a legitimate sender, .. but an invalid reverse DNS PTR does > indicate they may *not* be legitimate and our email servers are configured > to reject. > > The problem is that MXToobox only checks for the existance of a PTR record > and does not match the hostname. I have since found a way to accurately > show the discrepancy: http://www.debouncer.com/reverse-dns-check > > TFTR! > > Lee > _______________________________________________ > grlug mailing list > grlug at grlug.org > http://shinobu.grlug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/grlug > _______________________________________________ > grlug mailing list > grlug at grlug.org > http://shinobu.grlug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/grlug From megadave at gmail.com Thu Apr 23 12:30:25 2015 From: megadave at gmail.com (Dave Chiodo) Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2015 12:30:25 -0400 Subject: [GRLUG] SMTP reverse DNS validation In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Forgot to complete the verification sequence: *The verification starts with getting the PTR for the IP address.Then, looking up A records for whatever name(s) are returned from thePTR record.* The "A" record that comes back should match the IP address that you started with. Eg, If you get a connection from 1.2.3.4, and the PTR record says that is " bighost.com", but then you look up bighost.com its at "6.7.8.9", it appears someone is trying to pretend to be bighost.com. On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 12:28 PM, Dave Chiodo wrote: > Its less about what the MX record, that it is about whatever server > the SMTP connection is originating from. (Some email services use one > set of servers as MX for receiving INbound mail, and a completely > different set of servers for sending OUTbound mail) > > The verification starts with getting the PTR for the IP address. > > Then, looking up A records for whatever name(s) are returned from the > PTR record. > > In this case, NEITHER of the names given for the PTR record have an A > record. > > The one missing the ".com" is of course invalid, and there is NO A > record for the other: > > $ dig 67-221-227-25.xiolink.com > > ;; Got answer: > ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NXDOMAIN, id: 10651 > > On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 12:14 PM, L. V. Lammert wrote: > > On Thu, 23 Apr 2015, Mark Farver wrote: > > > >> Not sure what you are saying...did you get more than one result to a PTR > >> lookup? Can you paste dig output displaying the condition? > >> > > MX > > crownpack.com. 2841 IN MX 10 > cpbsvf01.crownpack.com. > > > > ;; ADDITIONAL SECTION: > > cpbsvf01.crownpack.com. 2841 IN A 67.221.227.25 > > > > ;; ANSWER SECTION: > > 25.227.221.67.in-addr.arpa. 3600 IN PTR cpbsvf01.crownpack. > > 25.227.221.67.in-addr.arpa. 3600 IN PTR 67-221-227-25.xiolink.com. > > > >> Requiring anything beyond the existence of a PTR record on an incoming > >> message is problematic. You can certainly give positive score to a > machine > >> with valid and identical forward and reverse records but many legitimate > >> senders will not have that. > >> > > They may be a legitimate sender, .. but an invalid reverse DNS PTR does > > indicate they may *not* be legitimate and our email servers are > configured > > to reject. > > > > The problem is that MXToobox only checks for the existance of a PTR > record > > and does not match the hostname. I have since found a way to accurately > > show the discrepancy: http://www.debouncer.com/reverse-dns-check > > > > TFTR! > > > > Lee > > _______________________________________________ > > grlug mailing list > > grlug at grlug.org > > http://shinobu.grlug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/grlug > > _______________________________________________ > > grlug mailing list > > grlug at grlug.org > > http://shinobu.grlug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/grlug > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mikemol at gmail.com Mon Apr 27 08:29:31 2015 From: mikemol at gmail.com (Michael Mol) Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2015 12:29:31 +0000 Subject: [GRLUG] SMTP reverse DNS validation In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 12:14 PM L. V. Lammert wrote: > On Thu, 23 Apr 2015, Mark Farver wrote: > > > Not sure what you are saying...did you get more than one result to a PTR > > lookup? Can you paste dig output displaying the condition? > > > MX > crownpack.com. 2841 IN MX 10 cpbsvf01.crownpack.com. > > ;; ADDITIONAL SECTION: > cpbsvf01.crownpack.com. 2841 IN A 67.221.227.25 > > ;; ANSWER SECTION: > 25.227.221.67.in-addr.arpa. 3600 IN PTR cpbsvf01.crownpack. > 25.227.221.67.in-addr.arpa. 3600 IN PTR 67-221-227-25.xiolink.com. > > We ran into a similar problem here at VirtualInterconnect, but on the reverse side. You may have noticed I've been the one sending the Friday After Five emails lately, even when I wasn't the one going. That's because we'd switched our outbound MX to go through AT&T business fiber...and even though we'd given them correct instructions for setting up PTR records for the IP in question, they *added* the PTR record, rather than replace or edit the existing PTR record. So emails sent to the grlug list had a fifty-fifty chance of coming back with a good PTR record or a bad one. The solution, in our case? have them delegate the zone to our nameservers. It's all good, now. (Incidentally, if you have Comcast Business Cable, you *can* have them delegate DNS to you. Their tier 1 people cannot get it through their head that that's distinct from having them update a PTR record, though; I had to have a tier 1 guy leave a dictated note to a tier 2 guy so I'd get a callback from someone who knew what they were talking about...The Comcast Business people aren't what they used to be. They're still the cheapest source of upstream bandwidth at about $5/Mb beyond the base price, though.) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lvl at omnitec.net Thu Apr 30 11:22:40 2015 From: lvl at omnitec.net (L. V. Lammert) Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2015 10:22:40 -0500 (CDT) Subject: [GRLUG] Slightly OT, .. "Online Community" Message-ID: We're looking for an online structure for our family association, .. but all I have seen/used seem to be focused on a single aspect - e.g. Meetup - physical meetings. Is anyone aware of a platform that could be customized for a single organization? Something like phpbb but setup for a Membership Fee, allow picture uploads, as well as normal BB operation (of course), .. ? Thanks! Lee From megadave at gmail.com Thu Apr 30 11:30:43 2015 From: megadave at gmail.com (Dave Chiodo) Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2015 11:30:43 -0400 Subject: [GRLUG] Slightly OT, .. "Online Community" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Why not a google group? Bonus - its free. (And yes, you can make it "members only") On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 11:22 AM, L. V. Lammert wrote: > We're looking for an online structure for our family association, .. but > all I have seen/used seem to be focused on a single aspect - e.g. Meetup > - physical meetings. > > Is anyone aware of a platform that could be customized for a single > organization? Something like phpbb but setup for a Membership Fee, > allow picture uploads, as well as normal BB operation (of course), .. ? > > Thanks! > > Lee > > _______________________________________________ > grlug mailing list > grlug at grlug.org > http://shinobu.grlug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/grlug > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From topher at codeventure.net Thu Apr 30 11:33:29 2015 From: topher at codeventure.net (Topher) Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2015 11:33:29 -0400 Subject: [GRLUG] Slightly OT, .. "Online Community" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <55424B49.1040502@codeventure.net> On 04/30/2015 11:22 AM, L. V. Lammert wrote: > We're looking for an online structure for our family association, .. but > all I have seen/used seem to be focused on a single aspect - e.g. Meetup > - physical meetings. > > Is anyone aware of a platform that could be customized for a single > organization? Something like phpbb but setup for a Membership Fee, > allow picture uploads, as well as normal BB operation (of course), .. ? > > Thanks! > > Lee I'm a big fan of WordPress and bbPress, which would be like phpBB. Throw in BuddyPress and you have a self hosted Facebook. All as private and secure as you wish it to be of course. From mikemol at gmail.com Thu Apr 30 14:26:26 2015 From: mikemol at gmail.com (Michael Mol) Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2015 18:26:26 +0000 Subject: [GRLUG] No Friday After Five this week Message-ID: Really, I do want to hold another one of these again. Kyle's unavailable, and I'm, well, not feeling that great. Hope to see you all soon! Go out and enjoy the weather! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: