1362182794 Q * geb Ping timeout: 480 seconds
1362183120 J * geb ~geb@mars.gebura.eu.org
1362191209 M * Chlorek anyone?
1362191215 M * Chlorek ping pong?
1362191229 M * Chlorek which capability is responsible for sysct switching inside guest?
1362191267 M * Chlorek I'd like to unblock
1362191282 M * Chlorek *sysctl
1362203705 Q * bzed Ping timeout: 480 seconds
1362205517 J * bzed ~bzed@bzed.netrep.oftc.net
1362207694 Q * bzed Ping timeout: 480 seconds
1362208171 N * Bertl_zZ Bertl
1362208174 M * Bertl morning folks!
1362208235 M * Bertl Chlorek: CAP_SYS_ADMIN, but you do not want to give that lightly to a guest
1362208665 J * bzed ~bzed@bzed.netrep.oftc.net
1362209150 Q * bzed Ping timeout: 480 seconds
1362210656 J * bzed ~bzed@bzed.netrep.oftc.net
1362214627 J * nkukard_ ~nkukard@196-210-205-18.dynamic.isadsl.co.za
1362214774 Q * _WildPikachu_ Ping timeout: 480 seconds
1362215877 J * bonbons ~bonbons@2001:a18:20a:1601:ccdc:5532:de88:f032
1362217691 M * daniel_hozac other capabilities may be needed too, depending on which one it is about.
1362219033 J * X-ian ~chris@p4FCCEF48.dip.t-dialin.net
1362219533 M * X-ian Hi. I have some trouble with the lo network device: running debian 2.6.32 stock kernel, I missed lo. So I set nflags to ~single_ip and created lo in interfaces/0 . I assigned a private ip, made DNAT and SNAT ipfilter rules and started the vserver. now making incoming connections works. but outgoing connections have to explicitly bind to this address to get snat-ed. nc ... 25 fails and nc ... 25 -s 10.... works.
1362219662 M * daniel_hozac the Debian kernel doesn't come with automatic loopback?
1362219740 M * X-ian as far as i know they switched this off 
1362220239 M * X-ian I just got the idea to configure 127.0.0.1 at last. now it seems to work. 
1362220630 Q * X-ian Quit: leaving
1362226523 M * Bertl off for a nap ... bbl
1362226545 N * Bertl Bertl_zZ
1362227393 Q * ircuser-1 Ping timeout: 480 seconds
1362229608 M * Chlorek Bertl_zZ: seems it's not working
1362229610 M * Chlorek # vattribute --xid 153 --get|grep SYS_ADMIN >/dev/null; echo $?
1362229610 M * Chlorek 0
1362229641 M * Chlorek also all kernel.grsecurity.chroot_deny_* are set to 0
1362230126 N * ensc Guest693
1362230135 J * ensc ~irc-ensc@p54ADDD6A.dip.t-dialin.net
1362230543 Q * Guest693 Ping timeout: 480 seconds
1362230835 J * ircuser-1 ~ircuser-1@35.222-62-69.ftth.swbr.surewest.net
1362235198 M * Rockj I assume 3.8.1 will get a vserver patch due to the local user exploits (net_sock and another one) soon? :-)
1362236769 N * Bertl_zZ Bertl
1362236776 M * Bertl back now ...
1362236822 M * Bertl Chlorek: what's the exact command you are trying?
1362237708 M * Bertl Rockj: we'll see, important exploits/fixes get applied to longterm kernels as well
1362237779 M * Bertl but feel free to motivate me with a donation :)
1362238367 Q * eyck Remote host closed the connection
1362239180 J * eyck ~eyck@nat08.nowanet.pl
1362245960 J * Milhouse ~chatzilla@c-24-34-74-228.hsd1.ma.comcast.net
1362246104 M * Milhouse Hi All - getting Vserver going with Pacemaker.  To date, have been creating a separate Logical Volume for each vserver as a way of managing space.  Now, have created a Logical Volume for DRBD/Pacemker, are putting all Vservers in there.  Suggestions for how to manage vserver space?  Quorums?  Nested LVM?
1362246129 M * Bertl hey Milhouse!
1362246153 M * Bertl you have a bunch of options there, you can use disk limits with tagging
1362246178 M * Bertl you can also benefit from sharing disk space (and in return memory) via unifiaction
1362246199 M * Bertl but of course, you can partition the DRBD volume as well
1362246246 M * Milhouse OH...
1362246266 M * Milhouse So each time we create a vserver, we'd create a new logical volume in the DRBD?
1362246283 M * Milhouse I.e, is that what you mean?
1362246387 M * Bertl either that or as you already suggested, use lvm to manage/create subvolumes
1362246424 M * Milhouse OK, thanks(!)....will try both, see where things come out.  Appreciate it!
1362246448 M * Bertl but of course, with separate volumes/filesystems you'll lose the sharing as well
1362246464 M * Bertl (no change to what you had before :)
1362246497 M * Milhouse OK...didn't know that....so sounds like separate partitions more versatile...
1362246519 M * Bertl basically it all depends on your setup/needs
1362246526 M * Milhouse OK, thanks!
1362246544 M * Bertl for example, if you have 200 guests, all very similar, e.g. the same debian install, etc
1362246546 M * Milhouse PS - will post back when see where end up.
1362246552 M * Milhouse Bye for now..
1362246556 M * Bertl okay, cya
1362248753 Q * Milhouse Remote host closed the connection
1362250540 J * clopez ~clopez@108.30.165.83.dynamic.mundo-r.com
1362257163 Q * nou Ping timeout: 480 seconds
1362257480 Q * Chlorek Remote host closed the connection
1362260391 J * nou Chaton@causse.larzac.fr.eu.org