BitFolk Users

users@mailman.bitfolk.com

1117 discussions

Missing squeeze-updates entry from Debian squeeze /etc/apt/sources.list

by Andy Smith

Hi, I've recently noticed that the following line which is usually present in /etc/apt/sources.list on Debian squeeze installs is missing from BitFolk VPSes: deb http://apt-cacher.lon.bitfolk.com/debian/ftp.uk.debian.org/debian/ squeeze-updates main Our template OS image has now been corrected, but if your Debian squeeze VPS is missing this line then you may wish to add it. These are important package updates which are not security-related (those are still provided by squeeze/updates on security.debian.org). This will not apply if you have used the installer to get squeeze yourself. Cheers, Andy -- http://bitfolk.com/ -- No-nonsense VPS hosting _______________________________________________ announce mailing list announce(a)lists.bitfolk.com https://lists.bitfolk.com/mailman/listinfo/announce

13 years

Minecraft Server

by Daniel Case

Hey guys, Does anyone have a Minecraft server running on there VPS? I am thinking about running one on a Bitfolk VPS but I am not sure how successful it will be, also let me know how much memory you have if you can :) Thank you, Daniel

13 years

Re: [bitfolk] Time just moved backwards by 11 seconds so I'll just kill myself now.

by Keith Williams

It's only happened once on this machine, happened on urquell before move. I have a cron job checking for updates regularly so am confident that I have the latest dovecot installed. Mind you I am still running Lenny (plucking up courage to upgrade to Squeeze after Xmas) Thanks for the tip Jamie, I do have a script monitoring key services on the vps, it emails me at my gmail address when apache or bind etc go down, of course, if postfix goes down... I will modify the script now to do a restart on going down. Thanks for the replies folks Keith On 10 December 2011 10:34, Matt Molyneaux <moggers87(a)googlemail.com> wrote: > On Sat, 2011-12-10 at 08:40 +0000, Keith Williams wrote: > > A bit drastic, I must say! Personally, I'd just assume my watch was > > wrong. Full report from logwatch as follows:- > > > > Dovecot disconnects: > > Logged out: 2 Time(s) > > no reason: 6730 Time(s) > > > > **Unmatched Entries** > > dovecot: Time just moved backwards by 11 seconds. This might cause a > lot of problems, so I'll just kill myself now. > > I remember that there was this problem before, but during the big > > memory upgrade, we moved to a new box, I think. The 6730 disconnects > > are unrelated to this, I had a couple of unsuccessful dictionary > > attacks ondovecot (using same sets of usernames etc) > > > > The suicidal nature of Dovecot is not a concern for me in the least as > > I am the only user (well sort of) actually retrieving mail from > > here,but thought I ought to mention it. > > > > Server dunkel > > vps kwilliams (keynesweb.com) > > > > Keith > > -- > > > > Keith Williams > > > > If the only tool you have is a hammer, you tend to see every problem > > as a nail. > > - Abraham Maslow > > > > > > ทำดีได้ดี ทำชั่วไดชั่ว > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > users mailing list > > users(a)lists.bitfolk.com > > https://lists.bitfolk.com/mailman/listinfo/users > > You're using an older version of dovecot that doesn't know how to handle > a leap back in time, so kills itself for safety. I only ever had this > happen on urquell after a reboot. How often is this happening? > > M > > -- Keith Williams If the only tool you have is a hammer, you tend to see every problem as a nail. - Abraham Maslow ทำดีได้ดี ทำชั่วไดชั่ว

13 years

Time just moved backwards by 11 seconds so I'll just kill myself now.

by Keith Williams

A bit drastic, I must say! Personally, I'd just assume my watch was wrong. Full report from logwatch as follows:- Dovecot disconnects: Logged out: 2 Time(s) no reason: 6730 Time(s) **Unmatched Entries** dovecot: Time just moved backwards by 11 seconds. This might cause a lot of problems, so I'll just kill myself now. I remember that there was this problem before, but during the big memory upgrade, we moved to a new box, I think. The 6730 disconnects are unrelated to this, I had a couple of unsuccessful dictionary attacks on dovecot (using same sets of usernames etc) The suicidal nature of Dovecot is not a concern for me in the least as I am the only user (well sort of) actually retrieving mail from here, but thought I ought to mention it. Server dunkel vps kwilliams (keynesweb.com) Keith -- Keith Williams If the only tool you have is a hammer, you tend to see every problem as a nail. - Abraham Maslow ทำดีได้ดี ทำชั่วไดชั่ว

13 years

Bitfolk's spamassassin service configuration

by Richard King

Hi all I've moved my mailserver over to my Bitfolk VPS and I've configured it to use several spam-reducing tools. I'm also using Bitfolk's shared spamassassin instance as described here: http://bitfolk.com/customer_information.html#toc_3_SpamAssassin___London__UK (many thanks for providing this, by the way!) It occurred to me that this service might be doing some of the same things as I've configured locally and that this might be unnecessary duplication. I've looked for an explanation of the configuration on the wiki but I couldn't find one. I can see from the headers on incoming spam that Bitfolk's spamds check messages against at least bl.spamcop.net, dnsbl.sorbs.net and psbl.surriel.com: X-Spam-Report: ... * 1.2 RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET RBL: Received via a relay in bl.spamcop.net * 0.6 RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB RBL: SORBS: sender is an abusable web server * 2.7 RCVD_IN_PSBL RBL: Received via a relay in PSBL ... (IP addresses redacted to protect the guilty!) Andy / Bitfolk people: Would it be possible to list the external services against which your Spamassassin service is configured to check so that we can avoid double-checking them? For the record I'm adding zen.spamhaus.org to the mix as well as doing SPF and DKIM/ADSP checking (which might be duplicating DNS queries if Bitfolk's spamds are doing the same). Regards Richard. -- http://richardskingdom.net/ Twitter: @graphiclunarkid

13 years

Ubuntu vs. Debian (was Re: Ubuntu release party tonight - London)

by Graham Bleach

On 13 October 2011 15:12, Dom Latter <bitfolk-users(a)latter.org> wrote: > I trust I can ask this sort of question here without sparking a > religious war - but what advantages are there in using Ubuntu on > a server? I've been an Ubuntu desktop user for some years [1], > but for servers I generally stick with Debian. Based on about 8 years of running 1-3 low-usage personal servers on Debian and 6 months running ~150 Ubuntu server hosts professionally: Ubuntu Pros: - Hardware certification. I can buy hardware with a reasonable expectation that it'll work with a specific release without spending hours attempting to find out how well individual hardware components work. It's not a perfect scheme, but it's a start. - Vendor support. Dell, VMware and others package various useful bits of software and put them in their own repos. They don't all do a brilliant job at it (e.g. VMware's kernel modules are often several ABI versions behind the latest kernel security release) but they do it. [1] Ubuntu Cons: - Security releases. The Debian security team seem to ship patches first and the Ubuntu ones lag a bit. I don't think there's a hugely compelling reason to migrate between them. G [1] Whether or not you trust an organisation enough to add their repos to your apt sources is another matter. I tend to download the debs and stick them in a local apt repo, but this is significantly less work than packaging the software myself.

13 years

Re: [bitfolk] IMPORTANT: You need to renumber the IP address(es) of your BitFolk VPS

by Andy Smith

Hi Michael, On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 04:36:24PM +0000, Michael Stevens wrote: > I've been busily migrating. As far as I can tell I've now got everything > updated. Is there any easy monitoring I can do to check for traffic to > the old IP? You could use tcpdump. Something like this: # tcpdump -vpni eth0 'host 212.13.19x.y' (This is what we will be using to tell who is still using these addresses, later on) Cheers, Andy -- http://bitfolk.com/ -- No-nonsense VPS hosting

13 years

Redundancy options

by Nigel Rantor

Hi all, Just wondering if anyone using bitfolk has any form of redundancy in place and what their setup is like. By redundancy here I am thinking load-balancing web/db such that a single server experiencing problems doesn't render the site unreachable. I assume that VIPs aren't something that people can set up without network support. Cheers, n

13 years, 1 month

Re: [bitfolk] Small issue related to renumbering

by Deanna Earley

Can they be updated semi automagically at the same time backups/nagios change over, I.e. when they start being used... If it makes maintenance easier, you can remove the jane.vps. (sorry about the full quoted reply, this client doesn't do selective quoting :( ) -- Deanna Earley ----- Reply message ----- From: "Andy Smith" <andy(a)bitfolk.com> Date: Wed, Nov 9, 2011 15:32 Subject: [bitfolk] Small issue related to renumbering To: <users(a)lists.bitfolk.com> On Wed, Nov 09, 2011 at 03:17:54PM +0000, Paul Stimpson wrote: > Do you think you may automate the process of the DNS switch? Just to be sure we're talking about the same thing, I take this to mean the addresses that <account>.vps.bitfolk.com points to.. > If so would you rather we waited until that is in place to save > you the support tickets or did it now to get it out the way? As I say I have to admit I didn't consider these host names before we started, but now that the renumbering is underway it seems to me that changing what they point to en masse at any particular time is going to cause some problems for some people who are making use of them. The mapping would change before some people are ready. Meanwhile it seems likely that if the <account>.vps.bitfolk.com hosts continue to point at the old IP addresses until we are asked to change them, then this will cause least disruption. The mapping won't change but would still be pointing at an IP address that most likely works. So, at the moment it seems like the best thing to do is wait for support tickets asking for this mapping to be changed. Cheers, Andy -- http://bitfolk.com/ -- No-nonsense VPS hosting _______________________________________________ users mailing list users(a)lists.bitfolk.com https://lists.bitfolk.com/mailman/listinfo/users

13 years, 1 month

Small issue related to renumbering

by Keith Williams

Not a problem but may be when I remove the 212.13 address from my VPS When I first took on this VPS, I was unable immediately to switch my domain name across, so it was called wnrspca.vps.bitfolk.com This weekend, I did the renumbering on it and it went so smoothly, I thought I must have done something wrong. I changed the DNS A record etc for the domain hosted on it - westnorfolkrspca.org.uk. Everything is working and as I had prepared for the change by setting TTL on the nameserver to 15 minutes, by the end of the day, the old address was history and all was working well. This evening, I was thinking about the log in for the console and realised I use wnrspca.vps.bitfolk.com as the access address, so I did a dig of that name and it came up with the old 212.13 address. Perhaps I ought to put off removing the old address for a while Andy, is that something on your todo list or do you want me to raise a support ticket? Keith -- Keith Williams If the only tool you have is a hammer, you tend to see every problem as a nail. - Abraham Maslow ทำดีได้ดี ทำชั่วไดชั่ว

13 years, 1 month

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

BitFolk Users