Heads up -- email address change
I probably don't really need to send this, but... I will be changing my email address that I use for this list due to scumbag spammers getting hold of it. If you plan on replying to any messages of mine that have this email address of [EMAIL PROTECTED], please be advised that you will get a very nasty bounce. Please keep an eye on this list for my new address if you need to contact me individually. I believe I mistakenly posted to BLU using this address. That list archive doesn't strip email addresses. Amazingly, the alias I use for that list hasn't been scarfed yet. -- -Paul Iadonisi Senior System Administrator Red Hat Certified Engineer / Local Linux Lobbyist Ever see a penguin fly? -- Try Linux. GPL all the way: Sell services, don't lease secrets * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Linux on IBM Laptops / Survey Questions
On Thu, 11 Jul 2002, Bayard R. Coolidge wrote: So, if they could at least offer a model that can auto-install SuSE 8.0, that did not have any Microsoft product on it, I'd be very interested. I think Bayard hits upon a very good point here. If IBM can't justify selling Linux pre-loaded on laptops (and I understand why) then how about selling Thinkpads with no OS? Surely this is the next best (or for us geek types a better) thing. FWIW, I've had about 6 laptops so far - 5 Thinkpads and now a Sony Vaio Slimbook. Most of the Thinkpads were employer owned and I must say that most ran Linux w/o to much trouble (back to the 755 I think), the one glaring exception of course was the MWave modem. I'd also much rather be using one today (that is if they made an Athlon version :) --rdp -- Rich Payne http://talisman.mv.com * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Linux on IBM Laptops / Survey Questions
Rich Payne said: On Thu, 11 Jul 2002, Bayard R. Coolidge wrote: So, if they could at least offer a model that can auto-install SuSE 8.0, that did not have any Microsoft product on it, I'd be very interested. I think Bayard hits upon a very good point here. If IBM can't justify selling Linux pre-loaded on laptops (and I understand why) then how about selling Thinkpads with no OS? Surely this is the next best (or for us geek types a better) thing. FWIW, I've had about 6 laptops so far - 5 Thinkpads and now a Sony Vaio Slimbook. Most of the Thinkpads were employer owned and I must say that most ran Linux w/o to much trouble (back to the 755 I think), the one glaring exception of course was the MWave modem. I'd also much rather be using one today (that is if they made an Athlon version :) I recently bought a toshiba laptop to replace one that died. The old one had a working modem (28.8), the new one that has a winmodem. Everything else works very nicely. I have a PCMCIA modem just for winmodems, but it's be nice if the builtin one worked. The old laptops let you install a modem after you bought it, but that was always more $$$ then the PCMCIA modems. I'd say winmodems are the worst part of today's laptops and the easiest to work around. A non working graphics card or sound would make me return the laptop. btw - my old laptop was a P150. With a 1GHz Celeron on a wireless network, I never fire up my desktop. -- --- Tom Buskey * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Opinions on Reply-to (WAS: Abusing CC:)
On Thu, 11 Jul 2002, Derek D. Martin wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 At some point hitherto, [EMAIL PROTECTED] hath spake thusly: mwl's Reply-To suggestion is a good one. No, it isn't. The problem with setting reply-to is that it is done so infrequently that a responder is highly unlikely to notice, or to think of it. Except in the reletively rare instances when someone does set the reply-to header, reply means reply to sender only -- which (at least in the case where the user is using an e-mail client that actually does know how to handle mailing lists) is invariably what one wants. When one is replying to group e-mail which is not distributed by a list manager, this is the behavior that one expects. The trouble here is that mailing lists are different animals, and should have support for being treated differently... I know many of the people on this list personally, and often for me, a post incites a comment that I do want to share privately with them, and not with the list. Setting reply-to will pretty much guarantee that my private replies will be sent to the whole list. It won't take much of that for me to unsubscribe. A much better solution, IMO, is to use an e-mail client that understands mailing lists, or add support for it to your favorite mailer, or complain to the developers until they do. I've been trying to keep my big mouth shut on this one, but I just can't do it this time. I'm more often a lurker than not, but in this instance, I have some personal experience. I have a better idea... how about (this has definitely been mentioned before) people just take a moment to note who they're replying to? Making a mistake and replying to all when you meant to make a private reply or vice versa is HUMAN ERROR. It is *not* the fault of the mail client, it is not because they had their reply-to set and I write so many e-mail messages, I shouldn't *have* to check, or the developer's fault, or anyone else's fault but your own. I have personal experience with doing this (at WORK, no less...), and from what I gather, you do too, Derek. However, I merely accepted the fact that I had written the e-mail too quickly and had not paid enough attention to what I was doing. (The reply-to was set to the group mailing list, btw) People need to take the responsibility for their own actions. If you make a mistake and send a private post to a group, or vice versa, that is YOUR fault, and should be accepted as such. While it is certainly understandable and *I* for one wouldn't ever give anyone any flak for it, I think leaving a list because of that is merely giving in to injured pride. Anyway, that's my many-cents worth. - Dana -- Dana S. Tellier Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] Student Engineer University of New Hampshire InterOperability Lab 220 Morse Hall, NH 03824 Routing Consortium603-862-0090 FAX: 603-862-1761 * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Linux on IBM Laptops / Survey Questions
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 At some point hitherto, Paul Iadonisi hath spake thusly: 1) I refuse to pay full price for a piece of equipment that I'm not certain is 100% Linux compatible. (Winmodems+NonGPL Linmodem drivers != 100% Linux compatible in my book.) Why? You have a driver that works well, so why not use it? Why should this be considered not Linux compatible? I would agree that having a free driver would be better, but I don't understand the sentiment of throwing out good software (or at least usable software) just because it isn't free... 2) I refuse to pay the Microsoft Tax and though it's possible to avoid that with desktops, AFAICT, it is impossible with laptops. http://www.tuxtops.com/ I'd be willing to bet they're not the only people who will sell laptops without MS OS's pre-installed. I just don't care to do the research. Note that they do charge for installing a linux distribution... They also have an option to dual-boot Win2k, which costs an extra $179. - -- Derek Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] - - I prefer mail encrypted with PGP/GPG! GnuPG Key ID: 0x81CFE75D Retrieve my public key at http://pgp.mit.edu Learn more about it at http://www.gnupg.org -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE9LaTfdjdlQoHP510RArBsAJsGSmJXoCD9oD237C3PHITkmbTJqgCfS7I2 X3ihZgXsvO6qprBiHLmiDCk= =VL7b -END PGP SIGNATURE- * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Opinions on Reply-to (WAS: Abusing CC:)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 At some point hitherto, Dana S. Tellier hath spake thusly: I have a better idea... how about (this has definitely been mentioned before) people just take a moment to note who they're replying to? Making a mistake and replying to all when you meant to make a private reply or vice versa is HUMAN ERROR. Humans are quite often creatures of habit, and this error is, for that reason, hard to avoid for those people who it snags... It is *not* the fault of the mail client, it is not because they had their reply-to set and I write so many e-mail messages, I shouldn't *have* to check, or the developer's fault, or anyone else's fault but your own. I have personal experience with doing this (at WORK, no less...), and from what I gather, you do too, Derek. Oh yes, as some people on this list who've been around long enough will attest... There's a certain squeegee joke that surfaces from time to time as a result. However, I merely accepted the fact that I had written the e-mail too quickly and had not paid enough attention to what I was doing. (The reply-to was set to the group mailing list, btw) People need to take the responsibility for their own actions. If you make a mistake and send a private post to a group, or vice versa, that is YOUR fault, and should be accepted as such. While I definitely agree with this sentiment, people make mistakes, and are creatures of habit, including in the types of mistakes they commonly make (have words that you commonly mistype?). Software can often very easily work around that fact, much as in this case. So if that's true, why not take advantage of it? FWIW, I no longer fall victim to that problem, thanks to the fact that Mutt has features for handling mailing lists, and a feature to ignore any reply-to header, both of which I use extensively. Were that not the case, I would fall prey to reply-to nearly every time the opportunity arose. Despite that, I'm still opposed to setting reply-to on general principle. The only valid reason to set it, IMO, is if you're (unavoidably, for some reason) sending mail from an address that can't be replied to, or at which you will not receive replies in time for some time-critical thing, and you need to make sure that replies will get to you. One more point, and then I'll shut up. This argument (reply-to vs. no reply-to) comes up very often on mailing lists. Ask yourself why that is. The answer, I believe, is that both behaviors annoy people. They contradict the way they work. In a sense, neither behavior is the right one. However, if the major mailers had well-designed and well-publicized features to deal with replying to mailing lists, I think this problem would likely go away entirely. - -- Derek Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] - - I prefer mail encrypted with PGP/GPG! GnuPG Key ID: 0x81CFE75D Retrieve my public key at http://pgp.mit.edu Learn more about it at http://www.gnupg.org -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE9LanWdjdlQoHP510RApZJAJ91d1P7D4/sv2vZoRGj/vHIWbH39gCfaJYe twaP5wn5qaJ9113RdqnCQCY= =3zJQ -END PGP SIGNATURE- * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Abusing CC:
On Thu, Jul 11, 2002 at 12:40:17AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Any message sent to the list address is not a private reply. I suspect you really mean that people who blindly hit Reply will send to the wrong address. You're right, they will. But that's not the fault of the mail headers, it's pilot error. I've said this before and I'll say it again: Check your headers before sending, or you will do the Wrong Thing sooner or later. Not only that, but many mailer's automatically accept the Reply-To address. Even if the responder is being diligent about checking mail headers, he'll have to open the original message and copy-and-paste your personal email address if he *doesn't* want to reply to the list. A major annoyance, and one that could lead to extra list traffic, which I don't like. IMHO, Mail-Followup-To is a cleaner solution. Additionally, it eliminates the Please Cc me with responses because I am not subscribed to this list type messages, as that information is provided in the mail headers. 1. Very few MUAs currently implement Mail-Followup-To, which makes it an ineffective solution in real life. Very true, though hopefully this will change, as I like the solution. It does seem to be more effective in more tech-oriented groups. 2. As noted above, the problem is really with people who blindly invoke the same function in their mailer for all kinds of replies, regardless of what they really want to do. So, people who blindly hit Reply All will still do so, and people who get into the habit of blindly hitting Group Reply will end up sending private replies to a group. I find that most people have adjusted to the difference between reply and Group Reply/Reply All (I might not have been able to say the same thing, say, 5 years ago). However, mailing lists throw a monkey wrench in the works. I believe that the proper (and yes, complete) use of Mail-Followup-To keeps the semantics of [Individual] Reply and Group Reply the same when mailing lists are used, including whether or not the individuals are subscribed to the list. I like *my* solution, and I plan to stick to it. :-) -- Bob Bell [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Parentheses in Perl are like shoes in the Caribbean. -- Larry Wall, creator of the Perl programming language * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Abusing CC:
On Thu, 11 Jul 2002, at 1:56pm, Bob Bell wrote: IMHO, Mail-Followup-To is a cleaner solution. Oh, I agree that a header specifically for this reason is a much better solution. However, until such time as Mail-Followup-To becomes an effective solution, I plan on including a Reply-To header as well. Hmmm... wait a second... doesn't... [quick web search]... yah. http://cr.yp.to/proto/replyto.html Mail-Followup-To is designed to be used in conjunction with Mail-Reply-To. As DJB says, RFC 822 did not recognize reply-to-author and follow-up as separate features. These two new headers do. Thus, one should include all three. Reply-To is set to the list address, Mail-Followup-To is set to the list address, and Mail-Reply-To is set to the author address. Legacy software which does not recognize the newer headers sends to the list by default, as is normal; newer software sees the Mail-Reply-To header and knows that it overrides Reply-To. Personally, I would have called the headers Reply-To-All and Reply-To-Author, just to make that distinction completely bloody obvious, but since I didn't write the spec, I don't have a say. :) -- Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not | | necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or | | organization. All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Abusing CC:
In a message dated: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 15:57:00 EDT mike ledoux said: M-F-T would be really nice, except that Mutt is the only MUA that uses it. Last I checked, the RFC it was proposed in had expired. Can someone explain exactly what M-F-T is *supposed* to do. I'm not as familiar with that header as I am with things like X-Reply-by and X-message-flag :) How is a mail client supposed to react to the M-F-T header? Thanks, -- Seeya, Paul It may look like I'm just sitting here doing nothing, but I'm really actively waiting for all my problems to go away. If you're not having fun, you're not doing it right! * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Abusing CC:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii I use exmh at home, and I have set up templates for the lists I use. Thus when replying to a listserv, the template preserves the Subject but not the addresses so I get a nice clean header. - -- Jerry Feldman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Boston Linux and Unix user group http://www.blu.org PGP key id:C5061EA9 PGP Key fingerprint:053C 73EC 3AC1 5C44 3E14 9245 FB00 3ED5 C506 1EA9 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Exmh version 2.5 12/25/2001 iD8DBQE9LfCC+wA+1cUGHqkRAvdfAJ90Uq+sz2JUVDMAfCLmeVvzO3lQcgCfXPIz jvs12SBGP6lHCvknJotbqIk= =zSeu -END PGP SIGNATURE- * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Abusing CC:
On Thu, Jul 11, 2002 at 04:54:27PM -0400, Jerry Feldman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I use exmh at home, and I have set up templates for the lists I use. Thus when replying to a listserv, the template preserves the Subject but not the addresses so I get a nice clean header. Which, incidently, removes the In-Reply-To and References headers, which hinder threading of messages. (Also, your email lines don't wrap, but that's a separate issue) -- Bob BellHewlett-Packard Company Software Engineer 110 Spit Brook Rd - ZKO3-3/U14 TruCluster GroupNashua, NH 03062-2698 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 603-884-0595 * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Abusing CC:
In a message dated: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 16:54:27 EDT Jerry Feldman said: I use exmh at home, and I have set up templates for the lists I use. Thus when replying to a listserv, the template preserves the Subject but not the addresses so I get a nice clean header. So are you doing something like: repl -nocc me -nocc cc -cc to Or something equivalent? -- Seeya, Paul * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Linux on IBM Laptops / Survey Questions
On Thu, 2002-07-11 at 11:31, Derek D. Martin wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 At some point hitherto, Paul Iadonisi hath spake thusly: 1) I refuse to pay full price for a piece of equipment that I'm not certain is 100% Linux compatible. (Winmodems+NonGPL Linmodem drivers != 100% Linux compatible in my book.) Why? You have a driver that works well, so why not use it? Why should this be considered not Linux compatible? I would agree that having a free driver would be better, but I don't understand the sentiment of throwing out good software (or at least usable software) just because it isn't free... Dem's fightin' words, but I'll not pursue it. It's possible we just have a different set of values in a few areas, but this is an absolute must for me. To make it short, I stand more in the Richard Stallman / FSF camp than in the Eric Raymond / OSI camp. (Though I'm not 100% in either camp.) 2) I refuse to pay the Microsoft Tax and though it's possible to avoid that with desktops, AFAICT, it is impossible with laptops. http://www.tuxtops.com/ I'd be willing to bet they're not the only people who will sell laptops without MS OS's pre-installed. I just don't care to do the research. Note that they do charge for installing a linux distribution... They also have an option to dual-boot Win2k, which costs an extra $179. Thanks for the info. I'll check into it when I'm in the market for my next laptop. On that one, I stand corrected, but the input to IBM still stands, of course. Follow that example, and I'll be a potential customer of yours for a laptop. Otherwise, I wouldn't be interested. I'd have to do some statistics gathering first. For instance, are tuxtop's laptops more expensive *in general* to defray the cost of licensing Windows for *all* of the machines they sell? Or are they truly only charging more for those they sell with Windows? If they are generally more expensive, then I'd be suspicious that they purchase them all with a licensed copy of Windows and resell them without it if that's what the customer wants, but bump the prices of *all* their machines to pay for it. No accusations, just curious. I'm actually too lazy to do the research right now, since I'm not currently in the market for a new laptop. -- -Paul Iadonisi Senior System Administrator Red Hat Certified Engineer / Local Linux Lobbyist Ever see a penguin fly? -- Try Linux. GPL all the way: Sell services, don't lease secrets * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Boston Linux Meeting Wednesday, July 17, 2002
When: Wednesday, July 17, 2002 7:00 PM (6:30 for general QA) Topic: Introduction to IBM AIX Presented by:Daoud Shariff, Technology Consultant - netpoint at earthlink dot net Location: MIT Building 4-370 Daoud will discuss IBM's AIX and how it compares to Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris et. al. Dee helped us out in the planning for the Installfest we had last year at the South End Technology Center @ Tent City. -- Jerry Feldman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Boston Linux and Unix user group http://www.blu.org PGP key id:C5061EA9 PGP Key fingerprint:053C 73EC 3AC1 5C44 3E14 9245 FB00 3ED5 C506 1EA9 * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Linux on IBM Laptops / Survey Questions
Derek D. Martin writes: Why? You have a driver that works well, so why not use it? Why should this be considered not Linux compatible? I would agree that having a free driver would be better, but I don't understand the sentiment of throwing out good software (or at least usable software) just because it isn't free... glossary: Free = Libre; transparent, open to inspection free = free as in beer I recommend maintaining a capability for distinctions... software which helps get winmodems to work on Linux, while not Free, can be considered as an extension to firmware. (Firmware is REALLY closed and proprietary, right? Consider the software in your SCSI adapter - non Free, for sure, but you don't throw it out.) On the other hand, something like a word processor, even if it is free, but not Free, may deserve to be trashed - if you're concerned about being able to read your documents a few years from now. Or if you're concerned about the software embedding your initials or Social Security number in your documents (or sending off such information to Passport Central). So, true: not everything which is non-Free needs to be rejected. But anything non-transparent, even if free/no-cost should be accepted only if you feel it's acceptable to undertake the accompanying risks. Being firmware-like probably helps, especially since in the case such as LTmodem Free software controls the interface and the data fed to the nonFree components - there's still an important measure of transparency. (Being firmware-like is no guarantee, however - consider Microsoft's Palladium initiative.) Bill Who cannot figure a way to get out from under Improv - which is not costing any money, but whose file format is understood by no product from any source today, including the orginal vendor; who will try very hard to enter into no further dependencies of this sort; and who has, finally, concluded that these lines of thinking demonstrate that Stallman has been right all along... * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
firewall eth0 weirdness
Here's a sequence of events (or observations) for which I'd love to hear an explanation, or even a plausible guess: My firewall box was just running like it always does. From a machine behind it, I started four or five SSH sessions to a remote system (my employer) and was busy using those masqueraded connections when everything just froze. After saying many bad words and flailing about on that internal machine for a while, I eventually walked over to the console of my firewall box (which is a DHCP client of the ATT cable modem network's DHCP server) and said ifconfig and saw the following - note how for eth0 it fails to mention any IP addr, Bcast addr, etc... eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:60:08:42:50:73 UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:1480187 errors:973 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:973 TX packets:239467 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:2290 txqueuelen:100 RX bytes:220287284 (210.0 MiB) TX bytes:35966230 (34.3 MiB) Interrupt:10 Base address:0x300 eth1 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:C0:DF:62:26:38 inet addr:192.168.0.1 Bcast:192.168.1.255 Mask:255.255.254.0 UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 . . . . ...at which point I said WTF?!?!' and issued the following commands: ifdown -a ifup -a ...which had the desirable but mystifying effect of (apparently) fixing everything; ifconfig subsequently reported: eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:60:08:42:50:73 inet addr:24.128.xxx.yyy Bcast:255.255.255.255 Mask:255.255.252.0 UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:1480410 errors:973 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:973 TX packets:239476 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:2290 txqueuelen:100 RX bytes:220307258 (210.1 MiB) TX bytes:35968421 (34.3 MiB) Interrupt:10 Base address:0x300 eth1 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:C0:DF:62:26:38 inet addr:192.168.0.1 Bcast:192.168.1.255 Mask:255.255.254.0 UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 . . . . I figured that maybe I just lost my DHCP lease or something, but the outage lasted almost 15 minutes before I (apparently) fixed it by issuing those ifdown/ifup commands, so I wonder about the DHCP theory... --M * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Abusing CC:
You know, with all the stuff you guys are talking about, this remains the only list I'm on where I have to reply-to-all if I want my reply to go to the list. Every other list sets the replies to go to the list unless you specify otherwise. Why is that? Why do I need to reconfigure my client to be able to reply to the list? -- TARogue (Linux user number 234357) Young men want to be faithful and are not; old men want to be faithless and cannot. -- Oscar Wilde * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Abusing CC:
On Thursday, July 11, 2002, at 09:10 PM, Thomas M. Albright wrote: You know, with all the stuff you guys are talking about, this remains the only list I'm on where I have to reply-to-all if I want my reply to go to the list. Every other list sets the replies to go to the list unless you specify otherwise. Why is that? Why do I need to reconfigure my client to be able to reply to the list? Here we go again! Erik * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: firewall eth0 weirdness
I have actually seen this before. Back when I had a cable modem, this would happen to me occasionally. The best explanation that I can give is that the DHCP server gave your IP address to someone else on your segment for reasons that I cannot fathom, nor could attbi suitably explain. Two systems end up with the same IP address, and everything goes wonky. Of course, it could be something completely different. C-Ya, Kenny On Thu, 2002-07-11 at 21:07, Michael O'Donnell wrote: Here's a sequence of events (or observations) for which I'd love to hear an explanation, or even a plausible guess: My firewall box was just running like it always does. From a machine behind it, I started four or five SSH sessions to a remote system (my employer) and was busy using those masqueraded connections when everything just froze. After saying many bad words and flailing about on that internal machine for a while, I eventually walked over to the console of my firewall box (which is a DHCP client of the ATT cable modem network's DHCP server) and said ifconfig and saw the following - note how for eth0 it fails to mention any IP addr, Bcast addr, etc... eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:60:08:42:50:73 UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:1480187 errors:973 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:973 TX packets:239467 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:2290 txqueuelen:100 RX bytes:220287284 (210.0 MiB) TX bytes:35966230 (34.3 MiB) Interrupt:10 Base address:0x300 eth1 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:C0:DF:62:26:38 inet addr:192.168.0.1 Bcast:192.168.1.255 Mask:255.255.254.0 UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 . . . . ...at which point I said WTF?!?!' and issued the following commands: ifdown -a ifup -a ...which had the desirable but mystifying effect of (apparently) fixing everything; ifconfig subsequently reported: eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:60:08:42:50:73 inet addr:24.128.xxx.yyy Bcast:255.255.255.255 Mask:255.255.252.0 UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:1480410 errors:973 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:973 TX packets:239476 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:2290 txqueuelen:100 RX bytes:220307258 (210.1 MiB) TX bytes:35968421 (34.3 MiB) Interrupt:10 Base address:0x300 eth1 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:C0:DF:62:26:38 inet addr:192.168.0.1 Bcast:192.168.1.255 Mask:255.255.254.0 UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 . . . . I figured that maybe I just lost my DHCP lease or something, but the outage lasted almost 15 minutes before I (apparently) fixed it by issuing those ifdown/ifup commands, so I wonder about the DHCP theory... --M * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. * -- The ebb and flow of the Atlantic tides. The drift of the continents. The very position of the sun along it's ecliptic. These are just a few of the things I control in my world. * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Abusing CC:
Hmmm The header-munging Vs. Non-header-munging debate. Is it Thursday already? ;-) On Thu, 2002-07-11 at 21:10, Thomas M. Albright wrote: You know, with all the stuff you guys are talking about, this remains the only list I'm on where I have to reply-to-all if I want my reply to go to the list. Every other list sets the replies to go to the list unless you specify otherwise. Why is that? Why do I need to reconfigure my client to be able to reply to the list? -- TARogue (Linux user number 234357) Young men want to be faithful and are not; old men want to be faithless and cannot. -- Oscar Wilde * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. * -- The ebb and flow of the Atlantic tides. The drift of the continents. The very position of the sun along it's ecliptic. These are just a few of the things I control in my world. * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Abusing CC:
If you take a look through the archives, about a year ago (might be longer now I suppose) several people on the list felt that it should be changed. There was a 'vote' held and it was decided to change to the behavior we have now. The other side of it was that those of who didn't agree with the change reserved the right to complain about it for the rest of eternity. --rdp P.S. The above change is also the reason you'll get two copies of this message. On Thu, 11 Jul 2002, Thomas M. Albright wrote: You know, with all the stuff you guys are talking about, this remains the only list I'm on where I have to reply-to-all if I want my reply to go to the list. Every other list sets the replies to go to the list unless you specify otherwise. Why is that? Why do I need to reconfigure my client to be able to reply to the list? -- Rich Payne http://talisman.mv.com * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Abusing CC:
On Thu, 11 Jul 2002, at 9:46pm, Rich Payne wrote: The other side of it was that those of who didn't agree with the change reserved the right to complain about it for the rest of eternity. I've said this before, but repetition is the very soul of the 'net. -- from alt.config -- Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not | | necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or | | organization. All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: decent dial-up providers in Andover, MA?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii You might try TheWorld (http://www.theworld.com). They've been around forever, and provide not only ppp, but also provide a UNIX shell account (SGI Irix). Suzanne Hillman wrote: I'm moving to Andover, MA at the end of the month and don't feel I can justify the expense of DSL. Does anyone have suggestions for decent dial-up providers in the Andover area? - -- - -- Gerald Feldman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Boston Computer Solutions and Consulting ICQ#156300 PGP Key ID:C5061EA9 PGP Key fingerprint:053C 73EC 3AC1 5C44 3E14 9245 FB00 3ED5 C506 1EA9 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Exmh version 2.5 12/25/2001 iD8DBQE9LjpU+wA+1cUGHqkRAuo5AKCDfBnjLcfM/SWuR438JeVC8cejbgCfdavG EaIhPoohnWUbsacEKtj4hwQ= =eBfY -END PGP SIGNATURE- * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Abusing CC:
On Thu, 11 Jul 2002, Erik Price wrote: On Thursday, July 11, 2002, at 09:10 PM, Thomas M. Albright wrote: You know, with all the stuff you guys are talking about, this remains the only list I'm on where I have to reply-to-all if I want my reply to go to the list. Every other list sets the replies to go to the list unless you specify otherwise. Why is that? Why do I need to reconfigure my client to be able to reply to the list? Here we go again! again, nothing. I'm just doing my part to keep the discussion alive. :) -- TARogue (Linux user number 234357) You can always tell a Texan, but you can't tell him much. - Chris Wall * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
Re: Abusing CC:
On Thu, 11 Jul 2002, at 4:32pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Can someone explain exactly what M-F-T is *supposed* to do. *sigh* Did this forum become write-only when I wasn't looking? :) http://cr.yp.to/proto/replyto.html In a public forum like this one, there are at least two types of reply one might want to make. One is a broadcast reply to the group (often called a followup). The other is a private reply to the author. Unfortunately, the only available standard header is Reply-To, so the distinction cannot be made. Hence, the addition of two new headers: Mail-Followup-To and Mail-Reply-To. M-F-T designates the address to use when making a broadcast reply to the group. M-R-T designates the address to use when making a private reply to the author. Additionally, the M-R-T header overrides the standard Reply-To header. The idea is that the list address will be given for Mail-Followup-To and Reply-To, and the author's personal address be given for Mail-Reply-To. For example: From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mail-Followup-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mail-Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Legacy software which does not support M-F-T or M-R-T will see the Reply-To header, and reply to the group (which is the nominal point of a discussion forum in the first place). New software will see the newer headers, and offer Reply to group and Reply to author functions, and also know to ignore the Reply-To header. -- Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not | | necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or | | organization. All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | * To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *
