Hi,
I've shortened Gregs mail to only have the relevant info for this list :-) Full mail is at http://lists.debian.org/debian-kernel/2009/10/msg00236.html
regards, Holger
---------- Forwarded Message ----------
subject: Re: Debian extra modules date: Dienstag, 6. Oktober 2009 from: Greg KH greg@kroah.com to: Ben Hutchings ben@decadent.org.uk cc: debian-kernel@lists.debian.org
On Sun, Oct 04, 2009 at 04:58:15PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: [...]
batman
A mesh routing system. Maybe a candidate for staging; try asking upstream.
Debian: http://packages.debian.org/source/sid/batmand Upstream: http://www.open-mesh.net/browser/trunk/batman/linux/modules
batman-adv
A mesh bridging system. As for batman.
Debian: http://packages.debian.org/source/sid/batman-adv-kernelland Upstream: http://www.open-mesh.net/browser/trunk/batman-adv-kernelland
Please post this code, if it's a module, and the developers want it upstream, I'll be glad to take it in staging.
[...] thanks,
greg k-h
Holger Levsen wrote:
I've shortened Gregs mail to only have the relevant info for this list :-) Full mail is at http://lists.debian.org/debian-kernel/2009/10/msg00236.html
batman
A mesh routing system. Maybe a candidate for staging; try asking upstream.
Debian: http://packages.debian.org/source/sid/batmand Upstream: http://www.open-mesh.net/browser/trunk/batman/linux/modules
As far as I know it isn't a part which is currently not targeted for linux-2.6 (staging or netdev) as this isn't self contained, but just a "hack" to improve gateway speed with batmand. Marek has to decide what to do with it further.
batman-adv
A mesh bridging system. As for batman.
Debian: http://packages.debian.org/source/sid/batman-adv-kernelland Upstream: http://www.open-mesh.net/browser/trunk/batman-adv-kernelland
Please post this code, if it's a module, and the developers want it upstream, I'll be glad to take it in staging.
This one should go staging sometime in the near future. We are in contact with Greg KH and some preparations are currently done to make it fit into staging and get it to a review for linux netdev soon.
Parts which are important: * TODO list for staging inside batman-adv folder * removed compat.h and remaining LINUX_VERSION_CODE (net_device_ops, unregister_chrdev) * clean Makefile and Kconfig * anyone who says how the further development should be done * anyone who sends the patch to Greg (probably Marek)
Also a open question is how the "issue" of the closed mailing list should be fixed. Vger doesn't seem to want us before we are successfully reviewed by the netdev maintainer. Moving the mailinglist every month doesn't seem to be a good idea. Opening this mailinglist could according to Marek create this ml useless as there is a big amount of spam send to it. There is a third option of having the ml semi-open with moderators for mails send by non-subscribers. But we have to decide who does the moderation.
@Marek: Is the postfix server configured to do greylisting? If yes, do you have a some statistics about how many spam mails come through and will be kicked out by the mailinglist system? If it isn't that much I would do some moderation for some months before we maybe move to a better option.
Best regards, Sven
On Tuesday 06 October 2009 19:55:46 Sven Eckelmann wrote:
As far as I know it isn't a part which is currently not targeted for linux-2.6 (staging or netdev) as this isn't self contained, but just a "hack" to improve gateway speed with batmand. Marek has to decide what to do with it further.
That is a qood question. It is self-contained as well but I don't think it makes much sense bringing it into staging as it is just a "hack". :) I'm not sure what the best path forward might be. Does it hurt keeping it the way it is ?
Parts which are important:
- TODO list for staging inside batman-adv folder
- removed compat.h and remaining LINUX_VERSION_CODE (net_device_ops, unregister_chrdev)
- clean Makefile and Kconfig
- anyone who says how the further development should be done
- anyone who sends the patch to Greg (probably Marek)
I think most of the things listed here are already done. It just needs to come together. I'm confident that this will happen soon.
@Marek: Is the postfix server configured to do greylisting? If yes, do you have a some statistics about how many spam mails come through and will be kicked out by the mailinglist system? If it isn't that much I would do some moderation for some months before we maybe move to a better option.
The postifx setup is quite simple at the moment: It rejects all unknown / unregistered mail. Greylisting is not in place yet. I quickly ran pflogsumm to give you an impression:
Per-Day Traffic Summary date received delivered deferred bounced rejected -------------------------------------------------------------------- Sep 27 2009 110 107 153 16 4874 Sep 28 2009 170 855 298 56 6894 Sep 29 2009 229 1235 379 90 6757 Sep 30 2009 176 525 420 38 7477 Oct 1 2009 187 222 377 20 7913 Oct 2 2009 132 132 414 17 8086 Oct 3 2009 112 117 374 18 7790 Oct 4 2009 128 658 294 42 6158 Oct 5 2009 243 1634 509 97 7657
But I tend to agree with you: We might have to face the fact that we have to improve the SPAM filter on our end and open the list. As a first step we could install greylisting and have a bunch of moderators to see how that goes.
@Jacob: How do you feel about that ?
@Andrew: Would you be willing to join the moderators group ?
Regards, Marek
Parts which are important:
- TODO list for staging inside batman-adv folder
- removed compat.h and remaining LINUX_VERSION_CODE (net_device_ops, unregister_chrdev)
- clean Makefile and Kconfig
- anyone who says how the further development should be done
- anyone who sends the patch to Greg (probably Marek)
I think most of the things listed here are already done. It just needs to come together. I'm confident that this will happen soon.
I have Makefile and Kconfig in my git tree. My tree is also up to date with respect to SVN on 09/27/09 02:21:54 which was the last commit to batman-adv. I would like to push some of the changes out of my git tree and into SVN, just to make it simpler for merging backwards and forwards. I guess i will mail Marek a diff sometime today.
Andrew
The postifx setup is quite simple at the moment: It rejects all unknown / unregistered mail. Greylisting is not in place yet. I quickly ran pflogsumm to give you an impression:
Per-Day Traffic Summary date received delivered deferred bounced rejected -------------------------------------------------------------------- Sep 27 2009 110 107 153 16 4874 Sep 28 2009 170 855 298 56 6894 Sep 29 2009 229 1235 379 90 6757 Sep 30 2009 176 525 420 38 7477 Oct 1 2009 187 222 377 20 7913 Oct 2 2009 132 132 414 17 8086 Oct 3 2009 112 117 374 18 7790 Oct 4 2009 128 658 294 42 6158 Oct 5 2009 243 1634 509 97 7657
I don't understand these figures. Ah, this is for the complete mail server. That explains why there was say 128 received on Oct 4, yet only a handful in the list archive.
But I tend to agree with you: We might have to face the fact that we have to improve the SPAM filter on our end and open the list. As a first step we could install greylisting and have a bunch of moderators to see how that goes.
Do you at least have spamassassin running? It would be interesting to see how many of the rejected emails spamassassin also decided were spam. Could you configure postfix to keep a copy of the rejected. I can then manually perform some tests with spamassassin and see how good it is.
Andrew
On Tuesday 06 October 2009 22:02:18 Andrew Lunn wrote:
I don't understand these figures. Ah, this is for the complete mail server. That explains why there was say 128 received on Oct 4, yet only a handful in the list archive.
Well, these include _all_ mail deliveries (postmaster, listmaster, root, trac changes, etc).
Do you at least have spamassassin running? It would be interesting to see how many of the rejected emails spamassassin also decided were spam. Could you configure postfix to keep a copy of the rejected. I can then manually perform some tests with spamassassin and see how good it is.
No spamassassin as well.
Actually, spending a lot of time on the mail setup is exactly what I did not want to do. I have my hands full with other stuff. But I gladly delegate the lists.open-mesh.net domain to everybody that wants to deal with it.
Regards, Marek
But I tend to agree with you: We might have to face the fact that we have to improve the SPAM filter on our end and open the list. As a first step we could install greylisting and have a bunch of moderators to see how that goes.
@Jacob: How do you feel about that ?
That sounds like a good idea, as long as it is a temporary (< 1year) solution. Certainly better than changing the list, and then changing it again.
Marek Lindner wrote:
That is a qood question. It is self-contained as well but I don't think it makes much sense bringing it into staging as it is just a "hack". :) I'm not sure what the best path forward might be. Does it hurt keeping it the way it is ?
Sry, doesn't want to upset you, but wanted to say that batgat isn't a complete solution like batman-adv, but an extension to reduce the load on the gateway. I don't think that it would hurt at the moment to leave it as it is. Have not attended Linux Plumber Conf 2009 - so don't know what was discussed there. As co-maintainer (Holger is the actual maintainer) of that package in Debian it doesn't hurt me at the moment.
Parts which are important:
- TODO list for staging inside batman-adv folder
- removed compat.h and remaining LINUX_VERSION_CODE (net_device_ops, unregister_chrdev)
- clean Makefile and Kconfig
- anyone who says how the further development should be done
- anyone who sends the patch to Greg (probably Marek)
I think most of the things listed here are already done. It just needs to come together. I'm confident that this will happen soon.
I categorized them in my head under todo because nothing of it is currently visible to the user. So some parts could be marked as "put them in the right place".
[...]
The postifx setup is quite simple at the moment: It rejects all unknown / unregistered mail. Greylisting is not in place yet. I quickly ran pflogsumm to give you an impression:
Per-Day Traffic Summary date received delivered deferred bounced rejected -------------------------------------------------------------------- Sep 27 2009 110 107 153 16 4874 Sep 28 2009 170 855 298 56 6894 Sep 29 2009 229 1235 379 90 6757 Sep 30 2009 176 525 420 38 7477 Oct 1 2009 187 222 377 20 7913 Oct 2 2009 132 132 414 17 8086 Oct 3 2009 112 117 374 18 7790 Oct 4 2009 128 658 294 42 6158 Oct 5 2009 243 1634 509 97 7657
But I tend to agree with you: We might have to face the fact that we have to improve the SPAM filter on our end and open the list. As a first step we could install greylisting and have a bunch of moderators to see how that goes.
Lets hope that greylisting would do a good job here as it is quite easy to setup (just done that for exim using greylistd - so cannot say that it is also that easy for postfix, but there is a package called postgrey). I never feel real happy about the filtering of spamassassines bayesian analysis as it marks important mails for me as spam from time to time.
Best regards, Sven
I never feel real happy about the filtering of spamassassines bayesian analysis as it marks important mails for me as spam from time to time.
You are not forced to use the bayesian analysis part of spamassassin. It has lots of there methods for detecting spam as well as Bayesian.
Andrew
On Wednesday 07 October 2009 01:37:25 Sven Eckelmann wrote:
Sry, doesn't want to upset you, but wanted to say that batgat isn't a complete solution like batman-adv, but an extension to reduce the load on the gateway. I don't think that it would hurt at the moment to leave it as it is. Have not attended Linux Plumber Conf 2009 - so don't know what was discussed there. As co-maintainer (Holger is the actual maintainer) of that package in Debian it doesn't hurt me at the moment.
Don't worry - I did not feel offended at all. :) Ok, then we leave it untouched.
I categorized them in my head under todo because nothing of it is currently visible to the user. So some parts could be marked as "put them in the right place".
I think we should maintain a wiki page about the progress, so that others can easily follow. What do you think ?
Lets hope that greylisting would do a good job here as it is quite easy to setup (just done that for exim using greylistd - so cannot say that it is also that easy for postfix, but there is a package called postgrey). I never feel real happy about the filtering of spamassassines bayesian analysis as it marks important mails for me as spam from time to time.
I just installed & configured postgrey. Let's see how that goes in the next days and then we can try to open the list ?!
Regards, Marek
On Tue, Oct 06, 2009 at 01:28:04PM +0200, Holger Levsen wrote:
Hi,
I've shortened Gregs mail to only have the relevant info for this list :-) Full mail is at http://lists.debian.org/debian-kernel/2009/10/msg00236.html
regards, Holger
Hi Holger
We are already in contact with GregKH about getting into staging. We are just missing an open mailing list we can use for receive feedback from the mainline community. Our current list is subscriber only. Once we have an open list we will be ready to post to GregKH.
Thanks for your interest in BATMAN and getting it into mainline.
Andrew
Holger Levsen wrote:
I've shortened Gregs mail to only have the relevant info for this list :-) Full mail is at http://lists.debian.org/debian-kernel/2009/10/msg00236.html
There was an announcement some hours ago which explains the (possible) backgrounds further[1]. It looks like the packages which builds binary packages from out-of-the-tree modules gets removed and it is now preferred to send the source upstream to staging by the author of the module, patch the kernel sources to include the must-have kernel modules or use the dkms[2] to build kernel modules.
I will search for some more information what must be done to support dkms and send some patches if it looks promising for upstream. There is currently only one package[3] in Debian which supports it. So lets see if we can add a second and third one :)
Best regards, Sven
[1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2009/10/msg00003.html [2] http://linux.dell.com/projects.shtml#dkms [3] http://packages.debian.org/squeeze/openafs-modules-dkms
Hi Sven,
On Dienstag, 20. Oktober 2009, Sven Eckelmann wrote:
I will search for some more information what must be done to support dkms
http://lists.debian.org/debian-kernel/2009/10/msg00683.html
:-)
regards, Holger
Holger Levsen wrote:
On Dienstag, 20. Oktober 2009, Sven Eckelmann wrote:
I will search for some more information what must be done to support dkms
Thanks. The packages[1,2] are now in Debian unstable. You must have the headers and kbuild for your running kernel installed (for example over linux-header-2.6 which is recommended by dkms). The rest is handled by dkms. Binary precompiled packages will disappear somewhere in the future when linux-modules-extra-2.6[3] gets removed..
I don't think that the dkms configurations[4,5] are useful for upstream at the moment.
Best regards, Sven
[1] http://packages.debian.org/sid/batman-adv-dkms [2] http://packages.debian.org/sid/batmand-gateway-dkms [3] http://packages.qa.debian.org/l/linux-modules-extra-2.6.html [4] http://git.debian.org/?p=collab-maint/batman-adv-kernelland.git;a=blob;f=deb... [5] http://git.debian.org/?p=collab-maint/batmand.git;a=blob;f=debian/dkms.conf....
b.a.t.m.a.n@lists.open-mesh.org
-
Andrew Lunn -
Holger Levsen -
Jacob Marble -
Marek Lindner -
Sven Eckelmann