Linux-Networking Digest #87, Volume #10 Tue, 2 Feb 99 11:16:04 EST
Contents:
Re: changing file ownership (Martin Hepworth)
ABR V.S. UBR (in ATM) ("D. J. Deng")
Re: IPX network collisions over Ethernet ("Manuel Mar�a Villapecell�n Cid")
Re: automount / umount SMB partition ("Manuel Mar�a Villapecell�n Cid")
Re: RH5.2 auto mount daemon amd-6.0a16-5 fails to run because no __bzero (Tim Moore)
Re: DOES LINUX SUCK ("GV Morgon")
Cannot use CRONTAB to schedule PPP connection but AT can ("iceman")
ISDN hangs up occasionally ("Juha Lehtonen")
Re: Linksys 10/100 (JunkDTectr)
Any driver for Xircom Cardbus Ethernet 10/100 + modem 56 ? (Hugo Croonenborghs)
Re: Kernel 2.2.1 ans IP Masquerading ("Brant Eaton")
??? setting up a mail forward linux box- newbie question ("Ed Killian-Keup")
Sendmail.cf build (Alan)
Re: Newbie: Samba and Win98 ("jim")
pidentd Question (K Lee)
Re: Lost Ability To Go Online After Recompiling (john)
Re: Slow Telnet (David Efflandt)
Re: Romote "root" login (Andrew Portoraro)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Martin Hepworth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.security.unix
Subject: Re: changing file ownership
Date: Tue, 02 Feb 1999 08:41:30 +0000
lipsin wrote:
>
> hi,
> i have a linux box. in it i have users with username containing
> dot, ie foo.john or foo.doe . the root will backup their files every
> now and then. so that, if they accidentally deleted something, the
> admin will be able to retrive it from the back. my problem is that the
> backup file is own by root. and when i move them back to the original
> users directory, i can't chanown back to the orriginal users. and this
> problem only effect users who has dot in their username. the error i
> get is
>
> # chown foo.john filename
> chown: foo.john: invalid user
>
> thanks for the help.
>
> lipsin
try
chown "foo.john" filename
Also having a '.' in the username is kinda odd. If you are using this so
you have proper mail drops them aliasing would be a better route.
--
Martin Hepworth
Blackwells Information Services
Tel +44 (0)1865 792792 x 3233
1st Rule of Computer Security
WYDSIWGY: What You Don't See Is What Gets You
------------------------------
From: "D. J. Deng" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: ABR V.S. UBR (in ATM)
Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 08:45:25 +0800
Hi,
What is the difference between ABR and UBR traffic?
Why do we need UBR if we already have ABR traffic?
The books said that the parameters required to specify
an ABR service are Minimum Cell Rate (MCR) and PCR which
is necessary to limit the peak cell-rate. If so, it seems
that the ABR service just likes CBR service!?
Any comments? Thanks for any help.
Regards,
D. J. Deng
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 01 Feb 1999 13:03:55 +0100
From: "Manuel Mar�a Villapecell�n Cid" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: IPX network collisions over Ethernet
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am having a problem locating the source of an error on our network.
> The message I get is:
>
> IPX: Network number collision 4
> eth0 EtherII and eth0 802.2
>
I also have this problem, but appears only from time to time, eventhough
its in a very used LAN.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 01 Feb 1999 12:58:19 +0100
From: "Manuel Mar�a Villapecell�n Cid" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: automount / umount SMB partition
Kelvin Leung wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I got a RH 5.1 server running as Samba server for windoze machines. And my
> own Linux workstation is on the same network. I would like to know how to
> setup the automount of Samba partition from the Samba server (do something
> in /etc/fstab?). So that I don't need to smbmount and smbunmount everytime
> I reboot the system... Thanks
>
> Kelvin
Well... try to inser your mount instruction at the end of /etc/rc.d/rc (this
is the boot file in Red Hat 5.0. I don't know whether it continues being in
5.1). The umount instruction should be in /etc/rc.d/rc6.d/init.d/halt
Best regards from Sevilla
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 31 Jan 1999 21:08:42 -0800
From: Tim Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: RH5.2 auto mount daemon amd-6.0a16-5 fails to run because no __bzero
Check dependencies for 16-5. BTW, what problems were you having? Seems to work
perfectly
as installed.
[tim@asus]$ rpm -qR am-utils-6.0a16-4
/sbin/install-info
portmap
/sbin/chkconfig
/bin/sh
ld-linux.so.2
libamu.so.1
libc.so.6
libgdbm.so.2
libnsl.so.1
/bin/sh
--
[Replies: remove the D]
"Everything is permitted. Nothing is forbidden."
WS Burroughs.
------------------------------
From: "GV Morgon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,linux.redhat.install
Subject: Re: DOES LINUX SUCK
Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 22:50:52 -0800
Here's my who 2 cents worth on this deal (and it's a lot of 2 cents):
I've only been playing with Linux for the last couple of weeks now, but
the thing that attracts me to it the most is the control aspect that one has
over the operating system. I've admined Novell and NT networks quite a bit
but neither really gives as much control and flexibility in the way the
machine operates as does Linux. Maybe I have some suppressed control freak
in me that is drawn to this OS. Sure it is more difficult to learn than NT,
but NT doesn't give the admin as much control over the OS. In the case of
Novell, I have found that when I recall when I first started playing with
Novell I probably had a more difficult time with Novell that with linux.
Coupled with Novell's need to basically be administered from a client
machine only I still find annoying. Sure it adds to stability, not running
applications on the server, but if the applications were stable to begin
with it wouldn't be much of a problem. And the resources Novell requires
are considerably more than that of Linux. Take a look at the new Novell
Intranetware 5. It has a slick little GUI interface that allows a few
administrative tasks to be conducted, and looks almost identical to
Xwindows. But it runs much slower than does Xwindows. I setup a Novell 5
machine on a Pentium 133 with 32 megs RAM and the GUI is many times slower
than Xwindows on a 486/66 with 8 megs (even though the GUI is strikingly
similar). I dont even want to think of what NT's performance would be like
on a similar type of macine. Now I'm not trying to fire up a OS vs. OS
debate. Let's not go there.
So then what is all this dragging on about? Simple, the comment about
the requirement you say to make things easier. Why? If a user wants an
easy machine, buy a Mac. About as easy as you can get. Granted you loose a
lot of control because of those safeguards but you have it easy. Want more
control with some added degree of difficulty, there's of course MS Windows.
You get more control but less safeguards to go with that control. You can
also get more performance out of such a machine of similar value hardware
because the OS takes up less overhead having less safeguards and idiot
proofing. Sure it is easy to simply throw more money at a machine to make
it run faster, but with large corporate networks bundling tens of thousands
of employees on a network every bit of performance counts. So that's where
an efficient OS comes into play. You want more efficiency you have to give
up creature comforts. You can't get something for nothing so that warm and
cozy GUI takes a hit out of the system performance. All that code to build
an intuitive OS that will do what you mean and not what you actually told it
to do is going to require a few extra CPU cycles to run.
Now if you're still with me I'll reiterate that I am no Linux expert, having
just been using it for the past couple weeks. I have found, however, that
it is not that difficult to deal with from my perspective given my
background. I posted a couple articles in needing help setting up a linux
machine as a DHCP server and I really didn't have the time to learn the OS
from the ground up and needed answers fast. The people here were kind
enough to take their time and help--I only hope to return the favor sometime
in the future. The scenario I came across is as follows: A company I am
working with is currently using Toshiba 440 laptops with NT to act as DHCP
servers. That's it, no other purpose in life but to hand out IP leases.
Tossed back in the wiring closet and patched into the hub they do their job.
But using those machines for such a puporse is basically a waste. I
presented the idea of Linux to do the job. Linux has the ability to be
fully functional loaded on a 486/66 with 8 megs and a 500 meg HDD (and that
was about all I knew of it at the time). They happpened to have a few
handfulls of HP Vectras of those specs that were sitting in a closet that
were going to be literally tossed in the dumpster.
Ok, so you may be thinking big deal, any one of the routers on their
subnets could have been configured to hand out IP leases. This however was
not an option due to corporate politics of another MIS department being
responsible for the routers. Now this may make for a cute story of how an
individual saved the company x dollars and released a dozen or so laptops to
see life as they were meant to, that is not the point. It shows that
certain OSes have their place. Sure you can do this and do that to whatever
to make it behave however, but are such actions really necessary? Why
re-invent the wheel.
Furthermore, the ability to implement such systems and maintain such
systems will only help that person out in their future career possibilities.
I can think of many people who can setup and administer an NT system. They
are almost a dime a dozen. But having the extra knowledge to implement
appropriate systems given the requirements will definitely benifit the
people who poses that knowledge. Job security, salary income, and a greater
sense of self all come into play.
Glenn
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message <784eru$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>
>In article <783tmf$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>>
>> 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.
lets analyze a little what you just said, shall we?
first, you babble and say i dont understand what i am talking about.
then, in the same breath, you utter the words "no cpmputer has this
capability".
this is exactly my point!!!!! which is the system we have now is
broke and can be much much more intellgeint. just becuase this system
does not yet exist, does not mean it can't be written.
with software one can do anything.
it is all a matter of how hard one want to work at it to make it easier
to use. you do this step by step.
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.
it can do better. it can list the missing messages automatically (without
the user having to know the command to do so).
it can do even more. it can telll the user what packages are missing and
ALSO ask them if they want to download them now autoammtically.
It can do even more. it can dialout itself, go to the site itself, and
download the packages itself instead of having the user do it.
it can do more. it can download the packages and install them automatically.
and so on.
you need to open your horizon more. and not be limited by what the
current system can do, and not try to do more to make it easier.
>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.
>
this is not hard. what is so hard about it???? what are the technical
problems that will prevent good programmers to be not able to design such
a system???
it is a matter of will. if programmers realy want to do such a system,
they will do it. but programmers are lazy as a rule. if someothing works,
then no they dont want to improve it. and they want to go do something else
new.
Bob
------------------------------
From: "iceman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Cannot use CRONTAB to schedule PPP connection but AT can
Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 15:06:43 +0800
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I have a simple problem:
After much experimenting, I finally got the PPP chat script to run properly.
Now I can
connect to the ISP by entering "/usr/local/bin/ppp-on" and disconnect by
entering
"usr/local/bin/ppp-off"
I try scheduling "ppp-on" command with the "at" command, which works fine.
But when I try to schedule the "ppp-on" with the "crontab" command, the
message
in the log file is always "connect script failed".
Why???
Kace
------------------------------
From: "Juha Lehtonen" <juha.lehtonen@#%�%�#%.#�#>
Subject: ISDN hangs up occasionally
Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 16:34:06 +0200
I have Zyxel omni.net external ISDN modem, which I have configured
as a modem. I use PPP and Daild to connect my lan to internet.
Everything else works fine but my connection closes down
quite often eventhough I am actively using the net.
The hung-up happen when I am connected to internet
from my client machines (Win98) but not when
the only machine connected to internet is my server ( Linux 2.0.35 / SuSE ).
I use masquareding but no firewall or proxy.
Juha Lehtonen
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JunkDTectr)
Subject: Re: Linksys 10/100
Date: Tue, 02 Feb 1999 07:18:44 GMT
If he's talking about the LNE100TX, it's not NE2000 compatible,
the Ether16's are but the 10/100 uses the Linux TULIP driver,
least that's what I use on my RH5.2.
In article <790foj$rac$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
says...
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Hello everyone.
> >
> > I am new to Linux and I am having some problems detecting the network card.
> >
> > I have a linksys LTE100TX network card but Red Hat ( 5.01 ) installation did
> not
> > pick it up
> > how can I configure Linux to use the card ?
> >
> > Note: The chip on the card says Linksys
> >
> > Thanks in advance.
> >
> >
>
> They are NE2000 compatible
------------------------------
From: Hugo Croonenborghs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: Any driver for Xircom Cardbus Ethernet 10/100 + modem 56 ?
Date: Tue, 02 Feb 1999 08:30:00 +0100
Hi,
Very short : Is there a driver for this 32 bit card ?
If yes, where to find it ?
If no, is there another way (without buying another card) ?
Thanx !
Hugo
------------------------------
From: "Brant Eaton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Kernel 2.2.1 ans IP Masquerading
Date: Tue, 02 Feb 1999 15:05:26 GMT
Absolutely! Just like the not-recently-updated HOWTO instructs. I must say
the Linux HOWTO is _priceless_. I could never dream of getting Linux
up/configured for my needs w/o the HOWTO. Hats off to the authors.
Ed Jones wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>
>>
>> The problem:
SNIP
>> Best Regards
>> Brant Eaton
>
>Brant, you did, of course do "make modules" and "make modules_install"
>after you compiled the kernel.. right?
>
>Ed
------------------------------
From: "Ed Killian-Keup" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: ??? setting up a mail forward linux box- newbie question
Date: 2 Feb 1999 08:52:40 -0700
Hi all.
I need to setup a Linux box (pentium with plenty of ram on an ethernet
network) running Red Hat 5.2. I can get everything talking (i think) but
I'm having some troubles.
I want to setup a number of user accounts, and will use this box as a
simple store and forward box for email. (it's part of a client's
firewall/security scenario) All it's going to do is accept inbound SMTP
mail for specific email addresses (for example [EMAIL PROTECTED]) and then
forward that message to another machine which is the actual internal mail
system.
I had thought I could setup POPMAIL users and then put .forward documents
in the home dirs for each account. But when I try to create a usr named
509wa, I get an error saying that it's an invalid name. I can create
wa509, but not 509wa. I can't find anything in any documentation that says
I can't start a user account with a number. But it appears that I can't.
Can I do this?
I NEED to get a number of accounts with names like this setup: 509wa,
308dw, etc.
so that I can have this box either accept valid mail for user 509wa or deny
mail that's not addresses correctly and then forward valid mail to the
internal mail system.
Now, can someone help me out? I'm a newbie, so be as informative as you
can in helping me to figure out a scenario that will work for me. Do I
need to have a pop server installed? can I just have sendmail configured
and have user accounts? How do I get a user account like 509wa? or how do
I get the system to recognize an alias like 509wa and forward the mail to
another machine?
Thanks everyone!
Ed K
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Alan)
Subject: Sendmail.cf build
Date: Tue, 02 Feb 1999 15:22:16 GMT
I am running Redhat 5.1 and I am having trouble building a sendmail.cf file
using M4 for Sendmail 8.9.1.1. Running M4 I get the following errors:
[root@linhost cf]# m4 ../m4/cf.m4 linux.mc >sendmail.cf
: command not found
'./sh/makeinfo.sh: syntax error near unexpected token `do
'./sh/makeinfo.sh: ../sh/makeinfo.sh: line 19: `do
The contents of the cf.m4 file are:
`define(`_CF_DIR_',
substr(__file__, 0, eval(len(__file__) - 8)))')')
divert(0)dnl
ifdef(`OSTYPE', `dnl',
`include(_CF_DIR_`'m4/cfhead.m4)dnl
VERSIONID(`@(#)cf.m4 8.29 (Berkeley) 5/19/98')')
The contents of the makeinfo.sh file are:
user=`whoami`
else
user=$LOGNAME
fi
if [ $usehostname -ne 0 ]
then
host=`hostname`
else
host=`uname -n`
fi
echo '#####' built by $user@$host on `date`
echo '#####' in `pwd` | sed 's/\/tmp_mnt//'
echo '#####' using $1 as configuration include directory | sed 's/\/tm
echo "define(\`__HOST__', $host)dnl"
I suspect a problem with being in the right shell but I have changed shells
and still can't get it to run.
Has anyone created a sendmail.cf file using M4 and can you point me in a
direction to solve this problem? I have used M4 on both an HP and AIX system
without a problem.
Alan
------------------------------
From: "jim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Newbie: Samba and Win98
Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 23:06:38 -0800
(Big snip)
> Under Win98 you will have to edit the file "host.sam" and enter the
>IP of the Linux machine.
>Reboot after the changes to take any effect.
Note that "hosts.sam" is a sample file from Microsoft... When you get the
file the way you want it, name it just "hosts"
(Rest of message snipped)
-Jim
------------------------------
From: K Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: pidentd Question
Date: 2 Feb 1999 07:04:14 GMT
Hello,
I finally got 2.2.1 to compile correctly and have just about everything's
working again, save for the above thing.
Please throw me a rope on this thing:
1. I can't rlogin to my school account cuz it tells me that my host (my
own linux box, really) does not respond to an authentication query (a-la
FRC 931 ident stuff). I had this working before (2.0.36) with this entry
in my /etc/inetd.conf:
auth stream tcp nowait nobody /usr/sbin/in.identd in.identd -l
-e -o (all one line)
or sometimes this would work as well:
auth stream tcp wait root /usr/sbin/in.identd in.identd -w -t120 -l
But neither's working right now. I know it's alright on the school end,
cuz my buddy could rlongin no problem. Can someone please help me out
with this?
Best,
Steve
------------------------------
From: john <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Lost Ability To Go Online After Recompiling
Date: Mon, 01 Feb 1999 23:13:30 -0800
You need to upgrade your ppp daemon. Read /Documentation/ppp.txt for
more info.
Alan Fried wrote:
> I am using AT&T as an internet provider and have been
> successfully been able to log on until I recompiled.
>
> When I try to log on using ppp-on as the command I get
> the following error message:
>
> This system lacks kernel support for ppp. This could be
> because the PPP Kernel module is not loaded or because
> the kernel is not configured for ppp.
>
> What do I have to do to get this fired up again?
>
> Thanx in advance
>
> Alan
--
John
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Redmond, WA -- Microsoft announced today
that the official release date of the
new operating system "Windows 2000" will
be delayed until the second quarter of
1901.
------------------------------
From: David Efflandt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Slow Telnet
Date: Tue, 02 Feb 1999 07:45:42 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 2/1/99, 8:53:51 PM, "Craig C." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
regarding Slow Telnet:
> It takes 45-60 seconds for a successful telnet from my NT into my
(RedHat)
> linux box. When I loaded Caldera there is no delay. Could someone
help me
> with this?
> Thank You [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You have a DNS timeout problem. Most likely reasons:
1. You are running 'named' and it is not properly configured.
2. You need names for any local IP's in /etc/hosts.
3. You have nameservers in /etc/resolv.conf that are not connected or=20
working properly.
------------------------------
From: Andrew Portoraro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.admin,comp.os.linux.help,nl.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Romote "root" login
Date: Tue, 02 Feb 1999 04:03:18 GMT
I guess the question is still pending. Even though one can su once logged in, I
still wonder how to login as root from a remote location in a more secure
manner.
Remco Nijkamp wrote:
> Dear Hackers,
>
> being a newbie to the UNIX world, I dont know if my q is silly, but I'll
> take the risk.
>
> I connect from NT4.0 ws to Linux Host (Red Hat 5.2)trought Reflection X
> (Telnet) and this works fine. I can connect as several users, run X-apps .
> The thing is that I need to connect as user "root". This does not work.
> Neither trough Reflection X nor trough Reflection Unix. This might be a UNIX
> setting, but I cant't find any info on the matter. A local login as "root"
> works fine. When I try to login through telnet I get the message "login
> incorrect" but I'm sure my PW is right.
>
> Does anybody have a clue?
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
> (It would be for my convenience if you would also reply by mail)
>
> Remco Nijkamp MCSE
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
