Linux-Networking Digest #162, Volume #10 Wed, 10 Feb 99 01:13:43 EST
Contents:
Re: Problem with RH5.2 and ISDN (Reece R. Pollack)
Re: Active server pages and Apache running on linux. (Evgueni Tzvetanov)
Rh5.2, IPMasq, Kernal 2.0.36, Win98 Netmeeting ("Chris Thornburg")
Performance of NFS (Rod Chamberlin)
Re: Firewall -- need help.. please (Luca Filipozzi)
Re: PORT 110 Connection refused !! (Frank Mayer)
Re: Can't ping my Gateway (but I can ping my own IP address) ("Gary Spivey")
Network Connections (MegaSurge)
Re: Linux & Windows & Samba / password encryption? (sam)
Re: This needs to be said............. ("sean")
Re: kde to start via xdm (Frank Mayer)
Re: Samba over the internet ("Christopher G. Petty")
The Sovereign: A carrier class Voice over IP solution ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Reece R. Pollack)
Subject: Re: Problem with RH5.2 and ISDN
Date: Tue, 09 Feb 1999 16:34:53 GMT
On Mon, 08 Feb 1999 21:11:01 -0500, David Rolling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> After setting up my Linux server I was shocked with a hefty
>telephone bill. I get 200 free local calls and $.08 per call after that
>from Ameritech (local telephone company). My ISP (ameritech.net) allows
>me approx. 80 hours per month of connect time with the "Unlimited" plan,
>so I can not have a permanent connection. The Linux server configured
>with the services below (DHCP & SAMBA), the network established a
>connect approximately every 15 minutes. I didn't notice for the first 3
>weeks. This cost me big time! Now I must keep the Linux server turned
>off until I solve this problem. I only turn it on to set DHCP resources
>once a week.
A couple of possibilities that come to mind:
1) If you have WINS enabled on any MicroSloth OS's they may be
generating DNS queries that your DNS server is forwarding to the
outside world. Cures for this vary from disabling WINS to making the
DNS server authoritative for the queried domains.
2) Check for a time synchronization service running on your Linux
system. These will generate periodic queries to the outside world.
The easiest way to debug this is to see what IP packet is causing the
router to fire up your ISDN connection. I don't know the Ascend
Pipeline but my Zyxel reports the packet that initiated the connection
on the 24.1 status screen. If the Pipeline doesn't do this, monitor
the ISDN line while watching the ethernet with TCPdump.
--
Reece R. Pollack
Senior Software Engineer
Attachmate Specialty Products Group
------------------------------
From: Evgueni Tzvetanov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: aus.computers.linux,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Active server pages and Apache running on linux.
Date: Tue, 09 Feb 1999 22:33:51 -0600
As a matter of fact NT is not so OLD and definately not GOOD!
What kind of operating system could be NT whan you can crash the kernel from a
task with no priority to do that!
Aaron Saikovski wrote:
> Is it possible to run microsoft's active server page technology on a linux
> box using apache..or do we still
> have to use good old NT for that?
>
> Thanks,
> Aaron
> email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Chris Thornburg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Rh5.2, IPMasq, Kernal 2.0.36, Win98 Netmeeting
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 1999 23:49:46 -0500
Quick question.. Does netmeeting work over Ip masq? I need to be able to use
the new icq alpha version as well. And does anyone know the ports to play
Rainbow 6 on www.zone.com or on www.mplayer.com ? If you have any sites or
doc's on that please send. Thanks
------------------------------
From: Rod Chamberlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Performance of NFS
Date: Tue, 09 Feb 1999 17:08:47 +0000
I am having significant problems with the performance of the NFS client
from a Linux box at the moment, and would be interested in any
suggestions.
As a simple test a tried untaring a 5MB file onto two different NFS
mounted filesystems (served by different boxes). On the linux box the
file being untared was stored on the local hard disk.
One of these is on the same hub as the linux box. Also of the other
machines tested one is on the same hub, and none of the tested
filesystems is local.
FS1 FS2
Linux 180s 46s
Other1 25s 12s
Other2 13s 13s
Unsurpisingly I'm not impressed that Linux is managing to take 180s over
a simple file write of 5MB (I'm sure a modem link would be faster:)
Has anybody got any suggestions as to what the problem might be
BTW the linux box is easily powerful enough to copy (128MB ram, 350MHz
PII, PCI network card)
--
.............................Rod
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Rod Chamberlin | [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tel +44 1703
232345 |
| Software Engineer | Mob +44 7803 295406
| QueriX | Fax +44 1703
399685 |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| The views expressed in this document do not necessarily represent
those of |
| the management of QueriX (UK)
Ltd. |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Luca Filipozzi)
Subject: Re: Firewall -- need help.. please
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 1999 09:14:00 -0800
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> To all linux gurus,
>
> I have to admit I am not exactly an expert yet at this firewall stuff
> but after trying unsuccessfully for days to configure this I thought
> maybe someone else may be able to help me figure this out.
>
> What I am trying to do is implement a firewall between the corporate
> network and the Internet. We have a class C network and most of the
> hosts on the network are running windows 95 or NT and already have IP
> addresses assigned to them. The optimum situation would be to keep
> everything assigned as it currently is and have the firewall be able to
> block certain IP addresses and ports from accessing the internet or to
> block anyone from the internet from accessing certain machines. I will
> draw a diagram to make things easier.
>
> (INTERNET)-----<ROUTER 209.199.199.1>----<ETH1{linux box}ETH0>-----<NT
> MACH 209.199.199.22>
>
> The netmask in all cases is 255.255.255.0 . What I would like to
> know... is this scenario even possible? Is it possible to firewall
> between hosts that are on the same network? From all the unsuccessful
> tries I would tend to think not. Well, if anyone has any ideas on what
> I can try I would appreciate any feedback.
>
> Thank you.
>
> Jim
Check out the Bridge+Firewall mini-HOWTO at
http://metalab.unc.edu/linux/HOWTO/mini/Bridge+Firewall.html
Or... you could take this opportunity to install DHCP, change from
statically assigned ip addres gateway etc and go to a server allocated
model. Less running around (after you set it up, that is).
But that would mean that you couldn't block access based on ip address.
Luca
--
Luca Filipozzi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: Frank Mayer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: PORT 110 Connection refused !!
Date: Tue, 09 Feb 1999 18:07:20 +0100
Edwin Calimbo wrote:
> shin, dong shik ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> : Hi,
>
> : When I telnet to localhost at 110 pop3 port, my linux box return this:
>
> : trying 127.0.0.1
> : telnet: Unable to connect to remote host: Connection refused
>
> : I dont know why and how to fix it. Really I have no ideas where to
> : check from the first..!!
> : please help me...
>
> : ---
> : /etc/hosts.deny:
> : ALL: ALL
>
> : /etc/hosts.allow:
> : ALL: LOCAL @my.domain.name
>
> : /etc/inetd:
> : pop2 ... ... ... /usr/sbin/tcpd ipop2d
> : pop3 ... ... ... /usr/sbin/tcpd ipop3d
> : imap ... ... ... /usr/sbin/tcpd imapd
>
> : I think those setting will be ok, but...
>
> : Thanks in advance...
> : shin, dong shik
>
> : ---
> : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> --
> ---
Looks like the pop3 server doesn't get started.
Have you checked /etc/services if there an entry called "pop3"?
The corresponding line at my machine reads:
pop-3 110/tcp
and /etc/inetd reads:
pop-3 ... ... ... /usr/sbin/tcpd ipop3d
Maybe in your /etc/inetd pop3 is called "pop3" and in /etc/services it's
called "pop-3" or the like.
btw: You have installed the pop-package, haven't you? - I forgot I hadn't
when I wanted to activate pop3 on my home machine! ;-)
--
Frank Mayer Technische Universitaet Wien,Dept. 183/2
phone: +43-1-58801-18352 http://www.prip.tuwien.ac.at/~may
------------------------------
From: "Gary Spivey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.questions,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Can't ping my Gateway (but I can ping my own IP address)
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 1999 05:33:59 GMT
Yes,
everything is physically connected. If I take linux down and bring up
Windows 95, everything works fine.
If I ifconfig down the lo interface, I can no longer ping myself or the
broadcast address. So it appears that the problem may be somewhere in the
card setup rather than in the network setup.
Thanks for the input.
Cheers,
Gary
Andrew Comech wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>I see nothing wrong in your routing table...
>Did you try PINGing other computers on the network?
>Or your own computer from the neighbor's machine?
>(Hate to ask that -- are you sure you are physically connected
>to the ethernet?..)
>Andrew
>
------------------------------
From: MegaSurge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Network Connections
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 1999 08:15:50 -0800
Well, if you follow my postings I have fixed my last problem...thanks for
the help. I now have another dilemma. Here it is in detail.
I have four systems on my network. All of them are running Slackware
kernel 2.0.34. I have configured all of them in the same manor so I can
get them connected to the network. All but one of them is now connected.
There is a difference with that machine from the others of which I'm not
sure if it will have an effect. The machine in question is running a
10Mbit eth-card and is a 486 50mhz. I am planning on using it for
Ipmasquerading for the rest of my network, so obviously the appropriate
protocols have been compiled into this systems kernel. This is the only
thing that is of primary difference between the machines. However, it
won't ping other machines nor can other machines ping it. What happens is
that when I try to ping it just sits there, then after some time it tells
me that it is resetting eth0. The card in question works because I had it
in another machine before and worked there. I think something with the
routing may be the problem but I'm not sure. When I check to make sure
the device eth0 is up and configured properly (by running ifconfig)
everything checks out. Also, when I run route the table is accurate...at
least as far as I can tell. (I'm merely comparing the tables between
machines...they all seem to be fairly similar.) So anyway, I'm not sure
what to check on that system right now. If anybody has any ideas please
let me know. Thanks.
P.S. You're all so very helpful, and that makes my linux experience very
happy. I appreciate it much.
"If there is a *quintessential zone of human privacy* it is the mind."
If you wish to send me a message using PGP my key is located here:
http://www.teleport.com/~megasurg/pgpmegasurg
------------------------------
From: sam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux & Windows & Samba / password encryption?
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 1999 04:56:38 GMT
==============476F427695CA0E0353402F11
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
"Tony Meza, MD" wrote:
> The samba package in Redhat 5.2 does not support the windows password
yes it does. I use it
>
> encryption scheme, but you can tweak Win98 to use plain text passwords,
> check out
> http://www.xmission.com/help/unix/samba/win98_samba.txt
>
> Tony
>
> Mitch Cant wrote:
>
> > Does anyone know if the new distribution of redhat 5.2 supports the
> > windows password encryption scheme
> > in it's samba package???
> >
> > Does anyone know a reliable ftp mirror I can download from???
> >
> > Everyone I have tried has at least some (10 - 100) invalid linked files
> > or something else wrong...
> >
> > I've made 3 CD's so far and none of them completely installs!!!! ARGH!
> >
> > thanks
> >
> > mitch
> >
> > --
> > -----------------------------------------------------------
> > Mitch Cant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > DDP Consulting Group, Vancouver BC Canada
> > Phone: 604-294-9193 Fax: 604-294-9155
> > Web Page: http://www.ddp.ca/
> > -----------------------------------------------------------
--
Remove the NONO in my reply to address
==============476F427695CA0E0353402F11
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
"Tony Meza, MD" wrote:
<blockquote TYPE=CITE>The samba package in Redhat 5.2 does not support
the windows password</blockquote>
yes it does. I use it
<blockquote TYPE=CITE>
<br>encryption scheme, but you can tweak Win98 to use plain text passwords,
<br>check out
<br><a
href="http://www.xmission.com/help/unix/samba/win98_samba.txt">http://www.xmission.com/help/unix/samba/win98_samba.txt</a>
<p>Tony
<p>Mitch Cant wrote:
<p>> Does anyone know if the new distribution of redhat 5.2 supports
the
<br>> windows password encryption scheme
<br>> in it's samba package???
<br>>
<br>> Does anyone know a reliable ftp mirror I can download from???
<br>>
<br>> Everyone I have tried has at least some (10 - 100) invalid linked
files
<br>> or something else wrong...
<br>>
<br>> I've made 3 CD's so far and none of them completely installs!!!!
ARGH!
<br>>
<br>> thanks
<br>>
<br>> mitch
<br>>
<br>> --
<br>> -----------------------------------------------------------
<br>> Mitch Cant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<br>> DDP Consulting Group, Vancouver BC Canada
<br>> Phone: 604-294-9193 Fax: 604-294-9155
<br>> Web Page: <a href="http://www.ddp.ca/">http://www.ddp.ca/</a>
<br>> -----------------------------------------------------------</blockquote>
<pre>--
Remove the NONO in my reply to address</pre>
</html>
==============476F427695CA0E0353402F11==
------------------------------
From: "sean" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: This needs to be said.............
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 1999 03:41:10 +1000
Maybe you should get out more.
There is more to life than computers!!!!
------------------------------
From: Frank Mayer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: kde to start via xdm
Date: Tue, 09 Feb 1999 18:37:19 +0100
Robertson, Rocke wrote:
> Hi. How do I get kde to startup via xdm on Caldera 2.3? Right now, it
> automaticaly
> starts fvwm which is fine, but I would like kde.
>
> Any help would be appreciated.
> Thanks
>
> --
> Rocke Robertson
> PWGSC/GTIS
> (613)991-2604
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi!
For having kde as standard window manager for your machine, you usually
would have to edit or exchange the Xclients-script.
On my RedHat 5.2 machine that script is located in /etc/X11/xinit.
For starting kde it looks like that a one-line-script is sufficient:
/opt/kde/bin/startkde
(or whereever you have installed the kde binaries)
Frank
--
Frank Mayer Technische Universitaet Wien,Dept. 183/2
phone: +43-1-58801-18352 http://www.prip.tuwien.ac.at/~may
------------------------------
From: "Christopher G. Petty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Samba over the internet
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 23:21:12 -0500
Glen:
Maybe if you could get Samba to bind to ports other than the netbios ports and
above the "privelaged" ports (i.e. something over 4000), and if you can get
Winblows to accept port numbers in the servername definitions (i.e.
\\a.b.c.d:pppp\sharename) you might get it to work.. Of course, I can't see any
way to do that in the manpages for smb.conf, so you might have to tweak the code
and recompile on the Samba side, BUT if Winblows will let you define the port as
well, it might work...
Of course this assumes you have admin access on the Linux box in question...
Just a thought.
_CGP
Glen Parker wrote:
> >I have a Red Hat 5.1 machine running samba flawlessly thus far.
> >However, I want to export a directory across the internet. Three main
> >questions:
> >1) Is there a quick and dirty method of making the directory mountable
> >on another machine (win95) given both machines have a full time
> >internet connection and real ip's. At this level I'm not concerned
> >about security. I just want to get it running and see it work. ie.
> >what else do I need to do/get/configure/??? The samba man pages don't
> >mention doing this as far as I can see.
>
> You shouldn't need to do anything special on the linux end, provided you
> actually have access to the netbios ports and all that. On the Win98, you
> *should* be able to connect by entering
> \\<dns host name>\<share name>
> in the explorer url box. If you can't use a domain name, you could also use
> a raw IP address.
>
> Oh wait, you'll most likely need to turn on password encryption on the samba
> server (man smb.conf to get started). Win98 won't transmit clear-text
> passwords I don't believe.
>
> >2) What are the security issues with method 1) above and how might they
> >be addressed?
>
> >3) If samba won't what will and be readable to a win95 client without
> >$$$added software?
>
> Glen
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: The Sovereign: A carrier class Voice over IP solution
Date: Tue, 09 Feb 1999 14:49:52 GMT
**************************http://www.sosinet.com*******************************
Sensible Office Solutions unveiled it's new Voice over IP product called
"Sovereign" The Sovereign provides a bridge between the public telephone
network and your data network. There are no changes in the way the user faxes
or makes phone calls. Since the Sovereign utiilizes your current telephones,
fax machines, PBX's, routers, key telephone systems, LANs and WANs, no new
equipment is needed!
The latest successful test SOSINC has provided was with Solectek
Corporations, a wireless network provider. "The voice and fax quality was
the same as you expect to get over a regular dialup telephone call" , said
Joel Kmetz, Solectek�s Director of Product Management. "After configuring the
Voice over IP system for the characteristics of the network we were using, it
ran perfectly. I have used other Voice Over IP systems, but the SOSINC�s
sound quality is the best by far."
For more information on SOSINC's Voice over IP solution, check out their web
site at www.sosinet.com.
Or call toll-free 1-877-SOSINET.
============= Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ============
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
