Linux-Networking Digest #953, Volume #9 Wed, 20 Jan 99 20:13:39 EST
Contents:
Re: Why Does Linux Networking Suck So Badly ? ("Forest Gump")
Re: DHCP and DNS (again) (Brian McCauley)
Re: Why Does Linux Networking Suck So Badly ? ("Forest Gump")
Re: How to install a RTL8139 network card ("Frank Dijcks")
Re: DOES LINUX SUCK ("Bob Taylor")
Re: DOES LINUX SUCK ("Bob Taylor")
Usernet/Logger (James Whelan)
Re: Why doesn't my ppp-on script work when su'ing (Stuart Morrison)
Re: This is Linux, not Windows, so why not superior flexibility AND idiot-friendly?
(jim)
Re: Connect without hub ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Samba and "Sendmail" on a notebook (Villy Kruse)
Re: 2 generic PCI NE2000 Nics how to ? ("Jim Orona III")
TCP/IP Configuration ("Judge Gotstein")
Re: Linux-Linux networking problem (Richard Hector)
Re: DOES LINUX SUCK ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: DOES LINUX SUCK ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Forest Gump" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Does Linux Networking Suck So Badly ?
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 18:43:41 -0400
Hmm,
Did it ever occur to you, that the reason it seems so hard is that you
probably don't know what you're doing? Linux just has a higher learning
curve -- but it pays.
I'm not flaming you, because I'm in exactly the same situation, but consider
the _fact_ that as soon as you have a good working understanding of what
you're doing, everything becomes so simple, you wonder how you ever went
wrong...
But unlike Windoze, you'll actually know how it works, not just how to get
it working on only one machine. In one month of use, it still doesn't work
perfectly, but my knowledge has at least doubled, just by using something
non-MS.
Then again, we have to wonder what you're doing on this board in the first
place.
If you don't like Linux, fix it or drop it.
>>Power, flexibility, extensibility, and _stability_
That would be "The Linux Way", as you (didn't) put it
j wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>The sheer number of messages posted here - usually half going
>unanswered - tells the tale ... Linux networking sucks.
> yidda-da-yadda
*note: this is a test to see if my news works*
------------------------------
From: Brian McCauley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: DHCP and DNS (again)
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 08:48:12 +0000
Stephen Carville <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Is it possible to have a DNS server forward a request to another
> server? Specifically, I want the primary DNS server for my company to
> forward unresolved requests for our local domain to the DHCP server
> which will also be running named. This way I can keep the database on
> the DHCP server up to date but update the primary server at longer
> intervals -- maybe once per day. From RTing the FM this _looks_
> possible (using the forwarding directive?) but my experience with DNS
> is too limited for me to commit to it.
AFAIK this is not possible using standard BIND. BIND does not forward
requests for domains for which it considers itself authoratative.
You can, of course, put the DHCP allocated names in a subdomain and
deligate it.
Alternatively use a DNS server that supports dynamic updates and send
it dynamic updates. Eventually dhcpd will be able to do this
automatically.
--
\\ ( ) No male bovine | Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
. _\\__[oo faeces from | Phones: +44 121 471 3789 (home)
.__/ \\ /\@ /~) /~[ /\/[ | +44 121 627 2173 (voice) 2175 (fax)
. l___\\ /~~) /~~[ / [ | PGP-fp: D7 03 2A 4B D8 3A 05 37...
# ll l\\ ~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ | http://www.wcl.bham.ac.uk/~bam/
###LL LL\\ (Brian McCauley) |
------------------------------
From: "Forest Gump" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Does Linux Networking Suck So Badly ?
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 18:46:20 -0400
I have to agree, read my earlier post with a grain of salt plz.
------------------------------
From: "Frank Dijcks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: How to install a RTL8139 network card
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 22:36:42 +0100
Well, I found the cause myself!
For anyone who's interested...
I swapped the 10Mbps and 100Mbps PCI network cards.
Somehow the port or interrupt assignment has something to do with it.
If anyone knows the real reason I appreciate a message.
Frank Dijcks
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ("Bob Taylor")
Subject: Re: DOES LINUX SUCK
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,linux.redhat.install
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 10:03:27 GMT
In article <783hik$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[snip]
> offcourse a real user friendly system would not put the purdon on the user
> to figure the order of those 6 or 7 rpms to install. but offcourse this is
> unix. if the things was so seemless with no manual steps involved and no
> things the user need to know before hand, then it will a boring system,
> and there will be nothing to tinker with.
>
> a real system will be much simpler that what you said.
>
> a real easy to use system will work like this:
>
> You see a "package" or set of packages on the net, to install them, you
> drag it/them , and drop it/them, on "my computer".
>
> DONE.
>
> the 'system' will WORRY about everything else.
>
> drag+drop.
>
> that is all what should be needed to do this.
>
> you can even drag a whole collection of packages, and it will still work.
>
> drag+drop.
>
> nothing more.
>
> none of this rpm crap at the user level. burry RPM inside only for those
> who want to use it directly.
>
> drag+drop.
>
> learn this concept. it's good for you.
>
> Bob
Shall we wait with bated breath until you get this *marvelous* installation
system designed, coded and *thouroughly* debugged?
BTW, I think a computer named Minerva is what you are looking for.
--
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
| Bob Taylor Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
|---------------------------------------------------------------|
| Like the ad says, at 300 dpi you can tell she's wearing a |
| swimsuit. At 600 dpi you can tell it's wet. At 1200 dpi you |
| can tell it's painted on. I suppose at 2400 dpi you can tell |
| if the paint is giving her a rash. (So says Joshua R. Poulson)|
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
------------------------------
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ("Bob Taylor")
Subject: Re: DOES LINUX SUCK
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,linux.redhat.install
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 10:03:28 GMT
In article <783tmf$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[snip]
> NO, NO! you dont get it !!!
>
> the system must operate at the logical and conceptual dimension, not at the
> step wise refinment space!! again, you put the burdon on the user to use
> some arcane command to do something.
>
> My point is that this whole concept is false.
>
> think a little.
>
> I am as a user want this program to exist on my machine.
>
> period. that is all what a user should express to the machine. NOT HOW to
> do it!! the machine and the system should figure the HOW !!!!
>
> again. real slow.
>
> the User says WHAT they want done. the system figure the HOW.
>
> it is really simple. what is hard to understand??
>
> Bob
>
I'm sorry but it is YOU who doesn't understand. You obviously don't
know what you are talking about. NO computer has this capability. You
prove me wrong by writing the software that does EXACTLY what you have
described above. I will install your software and say "I want the
current version of XEmacs installed with sound enabled and only the
GUI interface. Oh BTW I forgot, install it on my Alpha and also on my
Pentium" to my computer.
--
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
| Bob Taylor Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
|---------------------------------------------------------------|
| Like the ad says, at 300 dpi you can tell she's wearing a |
| swimsuit. At 600 dpi you can tell it's wet. At 1200 dpi you |
| can tell it's painted on. I suppose at 2400 dpi you can tell |
| if the paint is giving her a rash. (So says Joshua R. Poulson)|
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (James Whelan)
Subject: Usernet/Logger
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 22:00:21 GMT
I have usernet working ok, but I can't get the green light
to come on for ppp.. I had it working on a previous build.
Tracing through /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifup-ppp,
I think logger is supposed to return a 0 on success and
put this in a file ppp-ppp0.dev, which signals the green
light. But logger is not returning anything. Is something
involved else here? Furthermore, if persist is not used,
ppp-ppp0.dev is removed. Pretty screwy script.
------------------------------
From: Stuart Morrison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why doesn't my ppp-on script work when su'ing
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 23:38:27 +0000
"Jose Antonio C. Baduria" wrote:
>
> Hello Tim,
>
> I think there's a problem with your $PATH. Anyway, try using "su - root"
> when su'ing to root so
> that it would also run the profiles of root. It's just as if you logged in as
> root. I think this should work.
>
I'm have a similar problem too.
I wanted to allow a cgi program to start pppd to let everyone on my
Intranet bring up the link. There is apparently a problem with executing
pppd from a non local machine that can be solved by chmod'ing pppd but I
can't remember the mask to run pppd with as sticky UID of root -
Please someone help!! it's only four little digits I need!
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.portable,comp.os.linux.powerpc,comp.os.linux.setup
From: jim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: This is Linux, not Windows, so why not superior flexibility AND
idiot-friendly?
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 19:34:52 GMT
Alexander Viro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Probably piping the output of Word->ASCII convertor (I've heard there are such
> beasts) to grep might be used if you are *really* pressed.
strings(1) is your friend...
--
jim
--
http://madeira.physiol.ucl.ac.uk/people/jim/ Hold the line -
Love is delayed by essential engineering works.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
comp.dcom.lans.ethernet,comp.sys.sun.admin,comp.os.ms-windows.networking.win95
Subject: Re: Connect without hub
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 21:48:02 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Nico Kadel-Garcia) wrote:
> On 19 Jan 1999 23:40:39 GMT, Chris Cappuccio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >What about the situation where you are connecting together two machines
> >via RJ45 ? Don't ethernet cards with 10bT interfaces rely on the hub
> >for collision detection? If a hub detects a collision, it sends out a signal
> >which causes the cards to retransmit...Otherwise packets are lost?
>
> No. You cannot "collide" packets on a single segment of 10BaseT: one wire
> carries the signal in one direction, the other wire carries signals
> in the *other* direction. It is when you have to mix the signals together
> to multiple receivers that the hub or repeater if you're cheap has to
> say "the receivers are busy getting the previous packet, please wait".
>
> Now, a *switched* hub will be much more careful not to send packets
> to people who don't want them, and thus preserve your bandwidth. But
> they cost a hell of a lot more, and people are *very* careless about their
> names and labels for switches, repeaters, hubs, gateways, routers, etc.
Not true. Guy Wadsworth had a very long explanation in a previous post that
covers it very clearly. By the standards, 10bt is NOT full duplex (although
some manufacturers may be making some that are). Even though the signal
travels over seperate wires, if computer 1 sends a packet out, and almost
simultaneously, computer 2 sends one out as well, when the computers receive
a preamble while still transmitting their own packet, they will stop, send a
jamming signal out to signify a collision, back off for a random period of
time calculated using their own mac address, then listen to the wire again to
verify it is clear to send. While physically there may not be a collision on
the same wire, logically to single-duplex cards, there is a collision.
Because of this, EVEN if you are using a switched hub that is not running
full-duplex, you can still have collisions.
Also, Guy states in his post, as in here, that the hub detects a collision,
and sends a jamming signal on all ports. Today, that is probably correct with
any hub you buy, but originally there was a distinction between "dumb" and
"smart" hubs. Smart hubs had the circuitry to detect collisions, and were
more expensive than the early dumb hubs that were little more than soldering
all the connections together.
============= Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ============
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Villy Kruse)
Subject: Re: Samba and "Sendmail" on a notebook
Date: 20 Jan 1999 11:32:01 +0100
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Peter W <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Put valid hostname in /etc/hosts for 127.0.0.1. Make sure you have a domain in
>/etc/resolv.conf
>
>HTH,
>
>-Peter
>
And most important: A domain part is required! Thus the alias
localhost.localdomain
::::::::::::::
/etc/hosts
::::::::::::::
127.0.0.1 localhost localhost.localdomain
xx.xx.xx.xx yourhost.your.dom.ain yourhost
Villy
------------------------------
From: "Jim Orona III" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: 2 generic PCI NE2000 Nics how to ?
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 18:53:28 -0500
Rob,
I'm using 2 PCI NE2000 clones (Realtek RTL 8029 chip) and they work great!
I'm running Red Hat 5.1 (on kernel 2.0.36) with the IP Masq and pumping out
to an ADSL link (just got off a cable modem.... great speed but poor ISP
service and support). My Linux box came up and saw both cards without any
problem at all... but I would check and see that NE2000 PCI support is
compiled into the kernel instead of loading modules. Not that there's
anything wrong with modules, of course.
I certainly would have preferred a couple of 3Com 3C905s but I at over $100
versus the $25 each (I'm sure you can find them cheaper) for the clones, it
was no contest.
Good luck!!
Jim Orona
Rob wrote in message <783lq2$k9h$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>I read somewhere that you need to make some minor adjustments to use 2
>identical Nics in the same system. I have my Linux box setup with Ip_masq
>on my modem now, but I should be getting ADSL soon(yay!) and want to be
>ready for it. I already have a NIC thats the same as the one in the box
>now, can someone point me to some info on using both these cards at once,
or
>should I just get a "name brand" NIC and go with that ?
>
>
------------------------------
From: "Judge Gotstein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: TCP/IP Configuration
Date: 20 Jan 1999 23:37:10 GMT
I'm running a home Linux machine for a University Project and wanted to
know how to get TCP/IP running on one machine.
Is this possible please help me
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 00:57:30 +1300
From: Richard Hector <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux-Linux networking problem
Matt Kressel wrote:
>
> Jesse Hughes wrote:
> >
> > Hey ho.
> >
> > This is my third posting of this problem. The suggestions I've
> > received gave me something to look at, but I couldn't find anything
> > wrong. The routing tables for both machines look okay - They're
> > appended here.
> >
> > Here's the statement of the problem:
> > I have two Linux boxes (one a dual boot) and just purchased two 3c509s
> > with a hub. I'm having some trouble with the dual boot machine.
> >
> > The dedicated Linux box has address 10.0.0.1 and the dual boot
> > 10.0.0.2. When 1 pings 2, tcpdump shows messages being sent from 1 to
> > 2, but no response from 2. Ping reports similarly (sometimes, I get a
> > packet returned, but rarely. So far, it hasn't happened when tcpdump
> > has been running).
> >
> > When 2 pings 1, tcpdump shows a normal request and reply pattern, but
> > ping responds oddly. First, only even numbered requests are shown as
> > having replies, and their replies have duplicates. Second, the
> > reported time of the return trip is huge. It's almost as if the whole
> > packet has been shifted by one bit or something.
> >
> > This problem is only present when the dual boot (2) is running Linux.
> > Everything seems to work peachy when Win95 is running. I conclude
> > that something is screwy with my Linux setup on 2. However, it
> > doesn't seem to be the kernel -- I tried installing 1's kernel in 2,
> > as a test. No difference in the symptoms.
> >
> > Here's the results of netstat -rn:
> >
> > (10.0.0.2)
> > Kernel routing table
> > Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface
> > 127.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 U 0 0 1 lo
> > 10.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 U 0 0 0 eth0
> > 0.0.0.0 10.0.0.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0
> >
>
> Looks like some of the problem is here ^^^^, as you seem to be
> specifying "1" as your gateway. If 10.0.0.1 is not your gateway then
> all packets should be sent to eth0.
For pings which are entirely within the local subnet, gateway settings
are irrelevant. (The only point is, if 1 _is_ routing (to the Internet),
it should also be masquerading, as 10.0.0.0 addresses are not usable on
the Internet.
> Did you also compile the right
> driver for your card?
Possibly valid - but both cards are identical, and the other one works,
and copying the kernel gives no difference, so I doubt it.
> Also, your localnet destination netmask should be
> 255.255.255.0, most of the time.
255.0.0.0 is more "normal" for 10.0.0.0 (traditional class A address),
but as long as the mask is set the same in all 3 cases, it doesn't
matter.
> I would say that a correct table, with
> "1" as a gateway should look like:
> Kernel routing table
> Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface
> 127.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 U 0 0 1 lo
> 10.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0
> 0.0.0.0 10.0.0.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0
>
All that I can see different here is the netmask. I don't think it
matters.
> Additionally, the subnet 192.168.x.x is typically reserved for private
> LAN use.
So is 10.0.0.0.
Sorry - I've got nothing useful to say other than clearing some of that
up. All that routing info looks fine to me (other than routing the
private addresses onto the Net). And hopefully if I've screwed up
somewhere, someone else will come along and fix _my_ post :-)
Oh - except one thing. Have you tried running tcpdump on both machines?
Do they give the same results? (ie, do all the packets successfully
transmitted by one, get successfully received by the other?) Not that I
know what it proves if they don't ...
Richard Hector
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,linux.redhat.install
Subject: Re: DOES LINUX SUCK
Date: 20 Jan 1999 15:32:56 -0800
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>
>>you can even drag a whole collection of packages, and it will still work.
>>
>>drag+drop.
>>
>>nothing more.
>
>
> ...and the effect on the system be damned?
>
offcourse I assume the system is smart enough to do the right thing.
this is the basis of all of this.
why is hard for you to understand?
I am asking for a system with more IQ build into it than what we have now.
you want the same system. I want a smart system.
think at a higher level. dont have your mind closed and limited to only
what we have today.
Bob
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,linux.redhat.install
Subject: Re: DOES LINUX SUCK
Date: 20 Jan 1999 15:44:44 -0800
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>>look at the RPM example. certinally RPM can be made easier where it
>>finds missing dependcenies it will do more than just emit some stupid
>>message about missing a file.
>
> There are already such facilities for anyone who bothers
> to bother.
you must be really stupied.
you dont get even a simple point.
the point is not that there are 20 tools to do what I want. The point
is that these tools are not integrated into one complete system where
the user does not need to know which particular tool to use at any one
time. but tell the system what they need, and the system can go figure
which tools to use.
>However, you don't want to do a damn thing,
> not even the simple things. You have all the sincerity
> of Ponzi.
>
and you have the IQ of a moron for not being able to comprehend anything
more complicated than one little program in front of you and no more.
Bob
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.networking) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Networking Digest
******************************
