[00:43] <Azelphur> hey folks, I'm playing with the skeleton init script (/etc/init.d/skeleton) in the stop function, it seems to call start_stop_daemon --stop twice, the second one seems to hang for me, why?
[03:35] <HarryMudd> i'm using 12.04 on a VPS and i am allocated 16 ipv6 addresses but even though they are all present in /etc/network/interfaces ipv6 doesn't work
[03:36] <HarryMudd> i try to ping6 ipv6.google.com for exaple and i get network unavailable
[03:36] <HarryMudd> the gateway is also in /etc/network/interfaces
[03:37] <HarryMudd> ipv4 is working just fine
[03:46] <andol> HarryMudd: Assuming you have the correct info in /etc/network/interfaces it sounds like something you will want to check with support@your-vps-provider.
[03:46] <andol> HarryMudd: Unless you feel like sharing your /etc/network/interfaces, letting us check for any obvious errors.
[03:48] <andol> HarryMudd: I guess a paste of "ip -6 addr show" as awell as "route -6" might be helpful too.
[08:17] <rbasak> jamespage: do we need a mysql family blueprint?
[08:17] <jamespage> rbasak, gaughen already created one
[08:18] <rbasak> I don't see it
[08:18] <jamespage> rbasak, also I'm catching up with the percona guys tomorrow - are you around?
[08:18] <rbasak> Yes
[08:18] <jamespage> rbasak, servercloud-u-database
[08:18] <rbasak> Ah, thanks
[08:18] <jamespage> rbasak, also how is your curtin?
[08:19] <jamespage> rbasak, doing the serverstack redeploy today and want to configure a secondary block device during install for use later on
[08:19] <rbasak> I only know the high level architecture of curtin
[08:43] <caribou> jamespage: I'm looking at the unit tests for nova-cloud-controller following your MP comments
[08:44] <caribou> jamespage: I fixed part of it and in the process I'm seeing that part of my modifications are not covered by the current tests
[08:44] <caribou> jamespage: should I add more tests so they get covered or separate that into another bug ?
[08:45] <grr911> yo
[08:45] <grr911> i need to went
[08:45] <grr911> wtf is plymouth good for on a server ?
[08:45] <grr911> and how do i get intels framebuffer driver loaded in a nice way ?
[08:46] <verdeP> if ya gotta get anywhere, the smooth way
[08:46] <grr911> my TOy server has intel igp and it goes completely apeshizzles without it it seems
[08:47] <grr911> correction , what is plymouth good for on any linux box ?
[08:47] <verdeP> idk
[09:55] <DarkStar1> morning all. I am trying to set the local root for a particular user and followed this : http://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/177/how-do-i-set-the-default-ftp-root-folder-for-an-ubuntu-user-connecting-to-vsftpd . I restarted the daemon but when I login I still get directed to the user’s home i.e. /home/<username>
[09:56] <DarkStar1> so I set the user_config_dir to /srv/ftp and then in the /srv/ftp directory I created a file named after the user and put the local_root = /path/to/right_directory
[09:57] <DarkStar1> then changed the owership of both the file and directory to root:ftp
[10:38] <pmatulis_> morning
[10:41] <DarkStar1> morning
[11:00] <cocoa117> how do you make public_key authendication possible when you going through hoops of machines. E.g. server1 should only use firewall's public key to login, even when user connect it through hoops of firewall
[11:00] <cocoa117> at the moment, it seems the ssh always asking for local machine's private key to authedicates
[11:07] <rbasak> cocoa117: it's pretty common to have a bastion host setup, where all other machines use a ssh_config with "ProxyCommand=ssh -W other_host:22 foo@bastion" type arrangement.
[11:07] <rbasak> cocoa117: also, look into ssh agent forwarding, if that's what you want.
[11:27] <pp20> Hello all. Does anyone have experience with OpenFire? I havent used it in a few years and wondered if it had been superceded by something else before I start working on it again, i.e. dont want to waste my time with OF if there is an equivalant that is better or if OF isnt supported anymore.
[11:58] <Catdaemon> pp20: I'm currently using it for a project and all I know is it's absolutely awful
[11:58] <Catdaemon> the BOSH implementation is anyway
[11:58] <Catdaemon> I'm migrating to ejabberd
[12:01] <pp20> Catdaemon: "absolutley awful"?... really? how so? The last setup I had was it installed on ubuntu server, managed via a browser and all clients on the network using Spark.
[12:02] <Catdaemon> the BOSH implementation will randomly stop accepting connections
[12:02] <pp20> Catdaemon: seemed to run quick, nice OF interface when administering it, clients where Spark so looked ok I guess. could create groups as well which was good for different department.
[12:02] <Catdaemon> only thing I've changed is I've added a custom authentication query
[12:03] <Catdaemon> if you're just using the stock interface it's probably fine but the moment you customise it it becomes a nightmare
[12:03] <pp20> Catdaeomon: sorry, was is the BOSH implementation? is that a client like Spark?
[12:03] <Catdaemon> BOSH is how you talk to it via HTTP
[12:04] <Catdaemon> for web-based clients
[12:04] <pp20> Catdaemon: Oh, ok.
[12:05] <pp20> Catdaemon: the only way i found out about OF is having watched this ages ago: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytUB5qJm5HE
[12:05] <pp20> Catdaemon: dont know of that helps
[12:05] <Catdaemon> I chose it because it looked easiest to integrate, which is true, but it has stability issues
[12:06] <Catdaemon> ejabberd looks like the only other real option
[12:06] <Pupeno> Is there a way to specify resolv.conf domain when configuring it through resolvconf from /etc/network/interfaces?
[12:07] <pp20> Catdaemon: He uses CentOS. oh ok. will have a butchers at ejabberd see what its all about. thanks!
[12:07] <Catdaemon> if you're not comfortable editing really weird files run away now :p
[12:07] <Macer> do people still use jabber?
[12:08] <Macer> too bad it didn't pan out like it should have
[12:08] <Macer> one IM to rule them all
[12:08] <Catdaemon> I'm using it for web based IM, not really for its "true purpose"
[12:08] <Macer> lol
[12:08] <Macer> an integrated "groupware" chatting? heh
[12:09]  * Macer remembers when zimbra had awesome potential until they started removing features
[12:09] <pp20> I guess most people just stick with Skype or whatever googles version is for IM then?
[12:10] <Catdaemon> google uses xmpp
[12:11] <pp20> I installed and used this in 2009 just for certain internal staff to use. thought it could have been fully rolled out but never got around to it and then skype seemed to take over the world, well, thats all our clients ever wanted to use.
[12:12] <Macer> Catdaemon: i figure they'll get rid of it soon once they get their whatsapp working
[12:12] <Macer> facebook still uses xmpp too
[12:12] <Macer> i'm sorry. i meant that other thing google uses
[12:12] <Macer> facebook is whatsapp
[12:13] <Catdaemon> whatsapp also uses xmpp lel
[12:13] <Macer> but they all look like they're trying to stray towards proprietary IM protocols
[12:13] <Macer> oh does it?
[12:13] <Macer> honestly didn't know that. figured it was its own
[12:13] <Catdaemon> the technology is very much alive but not for what it was originally supposed to do
[12:14] <Macer> i think google may have closed its s2s access tho
[12:14] <pp20> Mace: something else always seems to come along thats for sure. I recently create an appear.in account which so far is much better than skype or google with regards to video quality conferencing. I guess with any video though it depends on the weakest link
[12:14] <Catdaemon> the video quality isn't due to technical constraints, it's due to cost
[12:14] <Macer> yeah well. the sad part is the whole world doesn't jump on the same boat ;)
[12:14] <Macer> and these companies don't want to share ecosystems
[12:14] <Catdaemon> they only won't share because the market likes ecosystems
[12:15] <Macer> heh. yeah seems so. but i mean .. cmon. IM should be universal across the board ;)
[12:15] <Macer> that was supposed to be the whole point of xmpp/jabber but of course it didn't pan out
[12:16] <Macer> i should try zimbra again inside a container
[12:16] <Macer> it's been a long while, maybe it has improved. last i remember they were just removing the features that didn't work instead of fixing them
[12:24] <pp20> Catdaemon: Macer: appriciate the feedback guys! gotta go, might be back later.
[13:05] <DamienCassou> hi
[13:06] <DamienCassou> when installing a package from a PPA, I get a dpkg error (code 1) and no further information
[13:15]  * ogra_ is pretty sure you get more than just an error code
[13:16] <DamienCassou> http://pastebin.com/Z4LE1RyH
[13:17] <DamienCassou> ogra_: this is what I manually copy/pasted from the virtual box VM
[13:19] <ogra_> so it failed during unpack ...
[13:19] <DamienCassou> ogra_: what can I do?
[13:30] <bieb> Is there a list somewhere of the differences between 14.04 lts desktop and server? or is it just the server has less "programs" and no gui by default install?
[13:32] <pp20> bieb: i think... no gui by default and additional options at setup to install LAMP etc
[13:34] <bieb> pp20: Thanks.. that's what I thought
[13:34] <bieb> pp20: but gui can be added during install? or need to apt-get after?
[13:38] <Armadillos> bieb: Usually you'll have to apt-get it after for a server install.
[13:38] <Armadillos> bieb: It also installs the "server" kernel, which is just a bit different then the desktop one.
[13:39] <bieb> Armadillos: bit different ... how?
[13:41] <Armadillos> bieb: That... I'm not too sure off the top of my head... :P
[13:42] <rberg_> thats not true anymore https://help.ubuntu.com/community/ServerFaq#What.27s_the_difference_between_the_kernels_linux-image-server_and_linux-image-generic.3F_What_architecture_is_linux-image-server.3F_Which_one_should_I_use.3F
[13:42] <bieb> Armadillos: no prob.. just figured I would ask
[13:42] <Armadillos> rberg_: Ahh, good to know.
[13:42] <bieb> rberg_: thanks for that link
[13:43] <rberg_> np!
[14:34] <brianblaze420> anyone have any input they can help me with. I want to host a website. I would love to do it from home. Why would you or wouldn't you recommend doing this and what would u recoomend?
[14:35] <Armadillos> brianblaze420: What do you plan on running on the site, and how much traffic do you think you'll get?
[14:35] <brianblaze420> its brand new so really none haha
[14:35] <brianblaze420> and that's the thing for now i know i can handle the traffic
[14:36] <brianblaze420> so that's why i am thinking about it
[14:37] <brianblaze420> plus it seems that for the 100 bucks a month it costs to get a dedicated server, if i spend an extra 100 on my ISP i can have more traffic
[14:38] <brianblaze420> i guess i am wondering if people host their sites from home as well?
[14:38] <Armadillos> brianblaze420: Do keep in mind that a dedicated server is running in a data center that has redundant power, network, etc.  If you run it at home, and your internet connection goes down, so does your site.
[14:38] <brianblaze420> i know but like i said i am not expecting crazy traffic right but u r right
[14:38] <Armadillos> brianblaze420: A lot of people do, but nothing that's "mission critical" or business.  If it's just for a personal site or something like that, then yeah, host it at home.
[14:39] <brianblaze420> it's the start of my business
[14:39] <brianblaze420> like in baby steps one of the first haha
[14:39] <Armadillos> brianblaze420: Also keep in mind that some ISPs can block your site, as they may have something in their contract saying you can't host a server at your home.
[14:39] <brianblaze420> no for sure i would talk to my isp and get an enterprise contract instead of my residential
[14:39] <Armadillos> brianblaze420: I would never recommend hosting a business site from the home.
[14:40] <brianblaze420> u r not the first to say so
[14:40] <brianblaze420> so i think i must do the right thing lol
[14:41] <Armadillos> Find a company out there that will host your site, and run it from there.
[14:41] <pp20> brianblaze40: If you are just testing a site i.e. you want to figure out how to do such a thing, great, go ahead, but if you are having to ask this qauestion AND its for a business I wouldnt attempt it.
[14:42] <brianblaze420> when i say business it's like selling lemonade lol it's not big
[14:43] <brianblaze420> and so i hate even saying that
[14:43] <brianblaze420> but i want it to be one day
[14:43] <pp20> Im not the type of person to just say "if you dont know it, leave it alone" im just saying if this is for your business then it is highly recommended to have this hosted, for the reasons others have said, traffic, redundancy, hacking etc
[14:43] <brianblaze420> so i should start thinking about it now is what u r saying :)
[14:44] <brianblaze420> do u guys think it makes a difference if i go to a local data centre or just check for any online?
[14:45] <pp20> brianblaze: for testing, playing around, trying to understand how these things work, go ahead and try but there are too many technical reasons to not do this if you dont know what you are doing.
[14:46] <brianblaze420> i am good to host a site and i am good with servers i am passed learning that stuff I am just really trying to figure out the downsides of hosting from home and when it comes down to it if i ever was hacked i don't want anyone on my home network
[14:46] <brianblaze420> but i could even stop that from happening
[14:46] <brianblaze420> but there are lots of good reasons to use a data centre
[14:46] <brianblaze420> and not many to do it from home
[14:46] <brianblaze420> so i am not going to fight it lol
[14:48] <brianblaze420> thanks a lot guys this topic has really got me thinking
[14:48] <pp20> if you know what you are doing im not sure why youve asked the question? (im not being rude by the way :) ) you need to check with your ISP for a start, too much traffic could result in them blocking your ip. is it really lemonade?
[14:49] <brianblaze420> i ask because this would be the first real site i would put from my house that could actually get visitors lol
[14:50] <brianblaze420> i wouldn't expect many but i wouldn't want it to suck for a visitor to come
[14:50] <brianblaze420> lol
[14:51] <pp20> brianblaze420: fair enough, either way, good luck! hope you do well but for this instance id go with hosted, it would be less of a headache (easier and faster too), good luck dude! :)
[14:51] <brianblaze420> thanks a lot
[14:51] <brianblaze420> i really appreciate it
[16:56] <lordievader> Good evening.
[17:04] <pmatulis_> evening
[17:04] <lordievader> Hey pmatulis_, how are you?
[17:05] <pmatulis_> not too bad lordievader , gonna rain here and then hockey tonight
[17:06] <lordievader> It just stopped raining here. Wish it would continue, then it would cool down a bit.
[17:43] <morph-> anyone know if there is a free alternative to linxacademy.com
[19:14] <mdeslaur> hallyn: thanks for testing the qemu-kvm package...seems we keep colliding :P
[19:20] <hallyn> mdeslaur: yeah, i guess they worked around it in their own pkg so maybe don't care about the qemu fix, but then why mark it as affecting qemu...
[19:20] <hallyn> (they haven't responded to anything i've said)
[19:35] <sudormrf> hey guys.  I am looking to generate a key with dnssec-keygen that is going to be the primary dhcp and dns server on a lan.  I am looking at using hmac-md5, but it looks like I cannot use the ZONE flag for the name.  If I use the HOST flag, will there be issues?  I looked at the MAN pages and it doesn't really go in depth about the difference and/or why you cannot use ZONE with hmac-md5 (not strong enough?), just wondering if
[19:35] <sudormrf>  HOST is ok.
[19:38] <fivetwentysix> My server that hosts novafist.com can’t receive email externally :(
[19:38] <fivetwentysix> Are my mx records okay?
[19:40] <sudormrf> http://www.cyberciti.biz/faq/unix-linux-bind-named-configuring-tsig/
[19:40] <sudormrf> that answered my question
[19:41] <guntbert> fivetwentysix: try yourself with   telnet 198.199.110.182 smtp      does it respond?  you can  terminate the session with    quit
[19:41] <fivetwentysix> guntbert well i use port 587
[19:41] <fivetwentysix> ostfix responds
[19:41] <fivetwentysix> but when i send emails to my domain from gmail for example
[19:41] <fivetwentysix> the emails dont appear in my mailbox
[19:42] <fivetwentysix> but when sent locally it works
[19:42] <guntbert> fivetwentysix: in that case try a full delivery - you need to talk smtp with postfix
[19:44] <fivetwentysix> guntbert: how?
[19:45] <guntbert> fivetwentysix: well ... thats easier for me to do than to tell you - if you want I can give it a test
[19:45] <qman__> fivetwentysix: gmail and other internet providers will connect to you on 25, not 587
[19:46] <guntbert> qman__: good point!
[19:46] <sarnold> and your port 25 just stalls; it would be better to configure your firewall to REJECT those packets than DROP them
[19:46] <qman__> fivetwentysix: most non-business ISPs block incoming 25, with no recourse, to prevent spam
[19:46] <fivetwentysix> oh
[19:46] <fivetwentysix> should i open 25 as well?
[19:47] <qman__> You must to receive internet mail
[19:47] <qman__> You also need mx records pointing at your server
[19:47] <sarnold> mx records look good
[19:47] <guntbert> fivetwentysix: on another line: do you have experience in configuring a mail server? if not you should not run one that is open to the internet
[19:48] <fivetwentysix> that did the trick :)
[19:48] <fivetwentysix> thanks qman__
[19:49] <qman__> fivetwentysix: in order to avoid getting on spam lists, you need to make sure your configuration is secure, and I highly recomend a spam filter
[19:50] <qman__> I've had success with Scrollout F1
[19:51] <fivetwentysix> qman__: how do i know if my configuration is secure?
[19:51] <qman__> fivetwentysix: that's where the experience comes in, internet email is a big deal
[19:52] <sarnold> time was there was a very nice mail testing tool, you'd telnet to it and it would test the machine you telnetted from :)
[19:52] <guntbert> fivetwentysix: why do you need a public mail server at all?
[19:52] <fivetwentysix> guntbert: not sure where else to host it
[19:52] <fivetwentysix> and i dont wanna pay for extra cloud services like gmail or whatever
[19:53] <guntbert> fivetwentysix: well I use zohomail
[19:54] <qman__> Well, some basics, make sure you only accept mail for your own domain, you don't allow unauthenticated relay, your passwords are secure, and set up spf
[19:54] <qman__> And a good bidirectional spam filter for insurance
[19:55] <fivetwentysix> qman__: smtpd_relay_restrictions = permit_mynetworks permit_sasl_authenticated reject_unauth_destination okay?
[19:55] <qman__> As long as mynetworks is set correctly (nothing on the internet)
[19:56] <fivetwentysix> mynetworks = 127.0.0.0/8 [::ffff:127.0.0.0]/104 [::1]/128
[19:56] <qman__> That's good, you should be ok on the relay front
[20:07] <fivetwentysix> Thanks for your help qman__
[20:21] <ahmadgbg> Hi guys, what is the best and simplest solution for server backup?? NAS or should i build a computer? NAS are very expensive for like 8 slots. What do you recommend?
[20:25] <qman__> ahmadgbg: backups are a very complex subject, and you need to take into consideration what your specific needs are, related to cost, availability, speed, reliability, size, etc
[20:27] <ahmadgbg> qman_: i need atleast 16TB with raid 5
[20:28] <ahmadgbg> a qnap 8 bay is like $1200
[20:28] <qman__> ahmadgbg: with standard quality drives, raid 5 offers no protection beyond about 8tb
[20:29] <ahmadgbg> qman_: you mean because of the rebuild time?
[20:29] <qman__> No, because of the unrecoverable error rate
[20:29] <ahmadgbg> qman_; okey.. so what should i run instead?
[20:30] <qman__> With a URE of 10^14, you are expected to run into one long before you hit 16tb
[20:30] <qman__> You would need drives with a URE of 10^15 or better, or use raid10, or raid6
[20:30] <qman__> Be warned, raid6 is very slow
[20:32] <ahmadgbg> qman_: how can i use raid 10 with many drives, isnt it only for 2?
[20:32] <qman__> Based on personal experience with all three, I would use raid10
[20:33] <qman__> No
[20:33] <qman__> Raid10 is with any even number of disks
[20:33] <ahmadgbg> But it wont work like raid 6
[20:33] <qman__> 50% capacity hit across the board, for the redundancy
[20:33] <ahmadgbg> right
[20:34] <ahmadgbg> I will have many differend raids for each pair?
[20:34] <qman__> No, it stripes across mirrored pairs
[20:36] <ahmadgbg> but i lose more space than raid 6
[20:37] <qman__> With 8 disks in raid 10, you will have 4 disks worth of capacity, you can lose any one disk, and up to 4 if you get lucky on which disks they are
[20:38] <ahmadgbg> hmm.. i need space.. its a storage server
[20:39] <qman__> Raid 6 would give you 6 disks of capacity, but it would be very, very sloe, and only offer 1 disk of protection with standard URE 10^14 disks
[20:39] <ahmadgbg> my plan was to have a 5x4tb in raid 5 for the server and 4x4tb in the nas
[20:39] <qman__> And your rebuild time would be like 3 weekss
[20:39] <ahmadgbg> Is the read and write speed slow or just the rebuild
[20:40] <qman__> all, read is fastest but still not that fast
[20:40] <qman__> Write is really slow
[20:41] <ahmadgbg> so im kinda screwed :P
[20:41] <qman__> I had a 11 disk raid 6 of 1tb sata disks, write speeds peaked around 35MB/s
[20:41] <qman__> Reads could hit 70 or 80
[20:42] <ahmadgbg> The problem is that the hard drives are so expensive. Im going with Seagate Constellation ES 4TB which costs around $380... Should i go with WB red? they are like half the price
[20:43] <qman__> I replaced it with a 20-disk raid10
[20:43] <qman__> Those disks should be URE 10^15, so you could use raid 5
[20:44] <qman__> But I would not put more than 4 disks per raid set
[20:44] <qman__> 8 bay, 2 raid 5s
[20:44] <qman__> If you use red drives, stick with raid 10
[20:45] <qman__> I have had good results with red drives in raid 10
[20:45] <ahmadgbg> i have only 8 slots for the drives
[20:45] <ahmadgbg> what should i do D:
[20:45] <ahmadgbg> :D
[20:46] <qman__> Unfortunately 8 is a bad number for parity raid
[20:46] <qman__> I would do raid 10
[20:46] <qman__> If you had 9, you could do two raid 5s with one hot spare
[20:46] <ahmadgbg> should i go 4x4tb on server with raid 5 and for the NAS 4x4tb raid 5?
[20:47] <qman__> As long as you use the good drives that should be ok
[20:47] <ahmadgbg> Seagate or WD?
[20:47] <qman__> And make sure you implement SMART monitoring
[20:48] <qman__> I personally do not buy seagates anymore, too many failures
[20:48] <qman__> The WD equivalent is the RE4
[20:48] <ahmadgbg> even the enterprise?
[20:49] <ahmadgbg> so going Seagate on the server and WD red on the nas, what do you think about that
[20:49] <qman__> That's a good strategy
[20:49] <qman__> But wd red is not 10^15
[20:49] <qman__> Only RE4s are
[20:50] <qman__> Or RE3, last gen
[20:51] <ahmadgbg> RE4 are actually cheaper than seagate
[20:51] <ahmadgbg> should i go RE4 on all
[20:51] <qman__> I would, or if you want to spread your risk, 4 of each
[20:52] <ahmadgbg> i want to save money :D
[20:52] <qman__> Lots of people use seagates, I just have better luck with WD
[20:52] <hallyn> jdstrand: gah.  i still have NOT reproduced your particular qcow2 corruption problem.  i suppose i should focus on the one i did get a few days ago, as that seemed easy to reproduce
[20:54] <ahmadgbg> qman_ how about WD SE
[20:56] <qman__> Not sure, I tried to open the spec sheet and my browser crashed
[20:56] <qman__> Check the unrecoverable read error rate, 10^15 or larger is ok for raid 5 at your sizes
[20:57] <qman__> 10^14 is not good enough
[20:59] <ahmadgbg> qman_: its says: <10 in 10^15
[21:00] <qman__> Sure? Should be 1 in X
[21:01] <qman__> 10 in 10^15 is the same as 1 in 10^14
[21:01] <ahmadgbg> http://www.wdc.com/wdproducts/library/SpecSheet/ENG/2879-771475.pdf
[21:02] <ahmadgbg> the RE are: <10 in 10^16
[21:04] <qman__> That's a pretty underhanded advertising tactic
[21:04] <ahmadgbg> ye :P
[21:04] <qman__> But yeah, the se would not be good enough
[21:04] <qman__> For raid 5
[21:06] <rberg_> and honestly raid6 might be fast enough for backups depending on how many users and how much data
[21:14] <ahmadgbg> Okey! Thanks for the help Qman :D
[22:04] <devslash> will Ubuntu Server work if  I install it on a PC and move the hard drive to a different server with different hardware
[22:11] <Patrickdk> devslash, depends on your definition of work
[22:32] <sarnold> devslash: "probably"