Linux-Networking Digest #166, Volume #10 Wed, 10 Feb 99 09:13:32 EST
Contents:
Re: Webphone (David Stanaway)
Re: Network Connections ("Chuck Jackson")
Re: swapon -s returning error (Rob O'Connell)
WIn95 'Disk Full' problem on samba ("Leon Opit")
ftp STALLS all the time. any ideas? Linux/Redhat ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Totally wierd problem with multilink-PPP over an ISDN TA ("JLS")
Linux and leased line ("Kresimir Pardon")
www servers not serving (Garry Wright)
Re: limiting Web site access in Linux (Corey J. Steele)
Re: ANNOUNCE? DRAFT 'Home Networking HOWTO' (Kevin Martin)
Re: swapon -s returning error (Corey J. Steele)
2 domains 1 linux ???? ("softalk")
IP Masquerading - Dropping Packets ("David B. Newcum")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David Stanaway)
Crossposted-To: aus.computers.linux
Subject: Re: Webphone
Date: 10 Feb 1999 12:08:18 GMT
In article <79p50h$h14$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Austin Wilson wrote:
>Hi
>
>I am trying to use webphone from Win95 through a linux box to the internet.
>The Win95 box is ip masqueraded to the linux box. I can call people and
>they can hear me but I cannot hear them. Also they cannot call me. What do
>I need to do to get it to work??
Maybe if you try using a package called
speak freely (Sorry, I don't have the URL, but on debian, the package
was called spreakfreely I think.. and it contained apps.. sfmike and
sfspeaker)
Otherwise, you will need to look into how the real and cuseeme IP-Masq
modules were written and see what network connections are used for the
webphone.
David Stanaway.
------------------------------
From: "Chuck Jackson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Network Connections
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 1999 12:19:30 -0800
is your ip forwarding on?
MegaSurge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>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: Rob O'Connell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: swapon -s returning error
Date: Tue, 09 Feb 1999 12:10:20 -0600
> /proc is not swap file. I not sure of this.
the first response to this post is more on the money - yes proc definitely is not
the swap file/dir - I'd agree with the first response - either no support for proc,
no mount mount for proc or maybe a change in the proc setup so some compatibility
flag needs to be set (ie swapon and procfs out of sync with each other)
good luck
Rob
> >
> > | When I run swapon -s I get this:
> > | swapon: /proc/swaps: No such file or directory
> >
> > does your kernel have support for the /proc filesystem? if not, this would
> > explain it
> >
> > | I don't think the swap space has ever been utilized. I tried loading my
> > | system, which has 48 mb of ram, with no utilization. Free mem dropped to
> > | less than 1MB, and still no swapping.
> >
> > clip the output of a 'free' so you can better see exactly what's going on
>
--
Rob O'Connell - "Work is the curse of the drinking class" - Oscar Wilde
lab#: (608) 2659467 mob#: (608) 3473838 home#: (608) 2519918
Work address: Plasma Physics, 1150 University Ave., Madison WI 53706
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://aida.physics.wisc.edu/~oconnell
------------------------------
From: "Leon Opit" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: WIn95 'Disk Full' problem on samba
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 1999 11:57:56 -0000
Can anyone help?
We use SAMBA from Suse Linux 5.3 distribution. It works well, however a
little issuette has been discovered,
>From Win95 clients, the user home directories return 'disk full' after 2Mb
have been used.
The problem does not occur UNLESS the directory is connected to the Win95
Client as a drive. i.e going through network neighbourhood works just fine.
quota is not enabled on the Linux server.
Am I missing the obvious?
I would appreciate an answer, anyone seen this and solved it?
Leon
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup,comp.protocols.tcp-ip
Subject: ftp STALLS all the time. any ideas? Linux/Redhat
Date: 9 Feb 1999 11:37:52 -0800
Hello,
This is using PPP account.
Recently, eveytime I try to upload a file to my own ftp site at
earthlink (my ISP), the ftp STALLS. It seems if a file is little large,
may be more than 30 KB, the ftp transfer stalls, and nothing happens.
not sure if Earthlink has changed something (I know they dont like Linux :(
to cause Linux ftp to stop working with their site.
has anyone else found this problem?
netstat tells me the session is always hanging in FIN_WAIT1 state
tcp 0 31791 1Cust179.tnt3.sfo3:4219 ftp-www.earthl:ftp-data FIN_WAIT1
btw, this problem occur when using command line ftp, or if I upload
the file using Netscape browser "upload file" function.
The interesting thing is that, I can ftp just fine to same site from NT !
So, it looks like Linux ftp protcol is not compatable with whatever Earthlink
are using? does this make a sense? where should I look for clues?
thanks,
Nasser
------------------------------
From: "JLS" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Totally wierd problem with multilink-PPP over an ISDN TA
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 1999 15:36:28 -0500
Post update I meant S71=1 in the init string.
Jeff
JLS wrote in message ...
>I had the same problem and I cured it with in ppp options have asyncmap 0
>and S71=1.
>
>Jeff Sofferin
>Knight of Night wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>>
>>My Linux box has served me very succesfully for many years as, among other
>>things, a router for my LAN. I connect to my ISP using a 3Com Impact IQ
>ISDN
>>TA.
>>
>>I recently upgraded the machine from a 486DX2/50 to a Pentium 100, and
from
>an
>>ancient version of Slackware to R.H. v5.2.
>>
>>After solving all the ususal problems associated with such an upgrade, I
>still
>>have one remaining issue. I am unable to connect to my ISP in the same
>manner
>>as I have in the past. Instead of a 2 B channel multilink-ppp connection
>over
>>my ISDN TA, I am running on only a single B channel, halving my bandwidth.
>>
>>Here are the specifics...
>>
>>On Slackware, I ran pppd from the command line, as root, with no command
>line
>>options. In /etc/ppp/options I had all the necessary options...
>>
>>/dev/cua1
>>115200
>>connect -f <chat script>
>>user <user listed in /etc/ppp/pap-secrets>
>>remotename <server listed in /etc/ppp/pap-secrets>
>>crtscts
>>defaultroute
>>lock
>>204.167.97.17:
>>
>>The chat script...
>>
>>ABORT BUSY ABORT "NO CARRIER" '' ATZ OK ATD<phone number> CONNECT
>>
>>pppd would load, dial, connect, bring up the first B channel,
authenticate,
>then
>>bring up the second channel, and I would have almost 115200bps of
bandwidth
>to
>>the 'Net.
>>
>>Then the upgrade...
>>
>>Now, under R.H. v5.2, I used Linuxconf to configure PPP. After checking
>all the
>>config files in /etc/ppp and /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts, I was
>convinced all
>>was well, so I rebooted.
>>
>>pppd came up, it dialed, connected, I had throughput, but the second B
>channel
>>stayed inactive. I tried changing, rearranging, editing, everything I
>could
>>think of to all the config files, but nothing made any difference.
>Actually, I
>>shouldn't say that. Sometimes it wouldn't work at all. |-) I even tried
>>calling pppd myself using my old config. That's when I really stumbled
>upon the
>>problem.
>>
>>You recall my old chat script...
>>
>>ABORT BUSY ABORT "NO CARRIER" '' ATZ OK ATD<phone number> CONNECT
>>
>>And the new one generated by Linuxconf...
>>
>>'' 'ATZ'
>>'OK' 'ATD<phone number>'
>>'CONNECT' ''
>>
>>I noticed that my connect script did not explicitly indicate to send
>nothing
>>after expecting the "CONNECT". It worked great back under Slackware so I
>didn't
>>even question it. But the new script does explicitly call for a send
>nothing
>>after expecting the connect. I tried removing it so the script looked
like
>>this...
>>
>>'' 'ATZ'
>>'OK' 'ATD<phone number>'
>>'CONNECT'
>>
>>When I did that, pppd dialed, connected, brought up the first B channel,
>>appeared to authenticate, and then it brought up the second B channel. My
>ISP
>>checked their log files, and said it looked like a normal login. But, I
>had NO
>>throughput. None from the Linux box itself, and none from the LAN,
>indicating
>>routing was down too. I looked at the interface config, it looked fine,
in
>fact
>>identical to the config present when I had throughput. Same story for the
>>routing table. In fact, everything I checked indicated that everything
was
>>fine, and I should be up and running. But I wasn't. I fiddled with
>everything
>>quite a bit more, then reverted everything to its default settings and
>tried
>>again. Same thing.
>>
>>So, I'm stumped, and left with only one B channel running at the moment.
>Any
>>help would be very grealy appreciated. TIA!!!
>
>
------------------------------
From: "Kresimir Pardon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Linux and leased line
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 1999 13:26:51 +0100
Hi,
Does anyone have some expiriance with analog (two USRobotics V.Currier
modems) leased line and slip? I tried to do using HOWTO and other
documentations but it doesn't work. Acutaly, this leased line is working
with DecStation 5000/25 and Ultrix 4.2a. I want to port to Linux/x86.
Any ides.
Kresimir
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Garry Wright)
Subject: www servers not serving
Date: 9 Feb 1999 19:53:13 GMT
I am running RedHat5.0 upgraded to 2.2.1 with all recommended updates.
I also use Netscape 4+ in several versions all of which show the same
behaviour.
A small number of servers establish a connection, download about 6k and
stall - permanently. Examples are www.hotmail.com and www.cdnair.ca.
Most servers accept my browser without difficulty, even the bank server
which I would expect to be the fussiest.
My internal network is using this machine as a gateway which I don't have
working again since the upgrade but this problem preceded the upgrade so
that should not be the answer. In addition I have my own nameserver on
this machine but again the problem predates the local nameserver daemon.
Is there a configuration problem which causes a few fussy servers to
reject connections that use domain names like linux.bogus locally even
though on the web they appear as being sourced from proper domains?1
------------------------------
From: Corey J. Steele <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: limiting Web site access in Linux
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 1999 07:04:18 -0600
even if it does, be certain that the other sites do not have any means by which
your users could hop out into the world (i.e. no links to search engines,
etc...)
-C
On Tue, 09 Feb 1999, sam wrote:
>>I wonder if the following entries in httpd.conf will work
>proxyBlock *
>proxyPass with selected domain list (map only those sites that you need)
>
>Andre Riscalla wrote:
>
>> Yes there is a way. One solution is to build a proxy with Apache
>> (www.apache.org). This will give you the flexibility to limit and
>> control web access. There is a pretty good article on how to do this in
>> the last sys-Admin magazine, february issue (www.samag.com)
>>
>> On Fri, 5 Feb 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> > Hi -
>> >
>> > I am in the process of setting up my first Linux machine (running RedHat
>> > 5.1). It will be used for Internet access by our employees to 2 specific Web
>> > sites (not in-house). My question is: is there any way that I can limit
>> > which Web sites may be visited? The fear by Administration is that folks will
>> > rummage about in all sorts of sordid Web sites on Company time, and they
>> > would like for me to eliminate that as much as possible.
>> >
>> > Thanks in advance for any help you can give!
>> >
>> > Best Regards,
>> > Karen Clendenin
>> >
>> > -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
>> > http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
>> >
>> >
>>
>> --
>> Contrary to popular belief, Unix IS user friendly. It just happens
>> to be very selective about who it decides to make friends with.
>>
>> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>> Andre Riscalla Sr. Network Engineer
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 514-940-5664
>> Data Service and Technology, Engineering Metronet Communications
>> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>
>--
>Remove the NONO in my reply to address
>
>
>
========================================
Content-Type: text/html; name="unnamed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Description:
========================================
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kevin Martin)
Subject: Re: ANNOUNCE? DRAFT 'Home Networking HOWTO'
Date: Tue, 09 Feb 1999 21:30:20 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, it says scott fagg
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I am trying to draft a HOWTO to cover the basic of pieceing together a
>home network based aroud a linux 'server'. AFter seeing numerous 'how do
>i ...' questions centering around connecting linux/95/nt machines on a
>home network, i thought there might be a need for something like this.
Lots of How-to's out there, some better than others. The more the merrier;
it may well be that someone who's having trouble with someone else's
approach will have better luck with yours (or vice versa! We can all live
with that, too).
>The ground i was considering covering was:
>
>Linux server:
> file serving (samba)
> mail server (pop + sendmail + fetchmail)
> internet gateway (firewalling, ip_masq)
Don't forget dial-on-demand. http://www.nic.com/~cannon/Linux/
[snip - I'm not so sure about including all the systems you could hook to
to a Linux server, if only because you can hook ANYTHING to a Linux
server.]
>I've pieced together a very rought draft full of holes and missing
>sections, which can be spotted online at:
>
>http://www.powerup.com.au/~sfagg
>Any potential audience?
I'm getting quite a few "attaboys" for my small piece of the puzzle. You're
welcome to hook up with it, re-interpret it, whatever.
------------------------------
From: Corey J. Steele <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: swapon -s returning error
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 1999 07:06:08 -0600
I'd say the lack of support for /proc is the more likely of your suggested
answers. just recompile the kernel with support for /proc, and try again.
-C
On Tue, 09 Feb 1999, Rob O'Connell wrote:
>> /proc is not swap file. I not sure of this.
>
>the first response to this post is more on the money - yes proc definitely is not
>the swap file/dir - I'd agree with the first response - either no support for proc,
>no mount mount for proc or maybe a change in the proc setup so some compatibility
>flag needs to be set (ie swapon and procfs out of sync with each other)
>
>good luck
>Rob
>
>
>
>> >
>> > | When I run swapon -s I get this:
>> > | swapon: /proc/swaps: No such file or directory
>> >
>> > does your kernel have support for the /proc filesystem? if not, this would
>> > explain it
>> >
>
>> > | I don't think the swap space has ever been utilized. I tried loading my
>> > | system, which has 48 mb of ram, with no utilization. Free mem dropped to
>> > | less than 1MB, and still no swapping.
>> >
>> > clip the output of a 'free' so you can better see exactly what's going on
>>
>
>--
>Rob O'Connell - "Work is the curse of the drinking class" - Oscar Wilde
>lab#: (608) 2659467 mob#: (608) 3473838 home#: (608) 2519918
>Work address: Plasma Physics, 1150 University Ave., Madison WI 53706
>mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://aida.physics.wisc.edu/~oconnell
------------------------------
From: "softalk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: 2 domains 1 linux ????
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 1999 13:22:23 -0000
Could someone please help ?
I have 2 domains registered domain1.co.uk & domain2.co.uk. I currently have
both with ISP's and dial in to them from a win98 machine. I have just
installed a linux Redhat 5.1 system on a 64k leased with a cisco router. The
ISP issued me with 16 static IP addresses plus 1 for the router. I have set
the router as the gateway and I can send and receive email from the
domain1.co.uk cos I put it in the domain box in Linux (I get that much) + I
can browse the web, but I would like to host both my domains on the linux
system and receive mail for them both. This is where I am lost. I get the
idea that it is possible to have 2 seperate web sites for 2 domains on the
same linux system. If so, could you please give me an idea as to what to put
in the network settings box in x windows to make this happen. I am a linux
newcomer as you may have gathered.
If you can help, thank you very very much.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "David B. Newcum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: IP Masquerading - Dropping Packets
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 1999 16:22:50 -0500
Reply-To: David Newcum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I'm running IP Masquerading on RedHat 5.0, and my setup is something
similar to this:
+---------------+
| 128.210.195.1 |
+-------+-------+
|
|
| +----------------+
+-------+ 128.210.195.38 | [linux]
| +----------------+
| (gateway = 128.210.195.1)
|
|
| +--------------+
+-------+ 192.168.38.2 | [win95]
| +--------------+
: (gateway = 128.210.195.38)
.
I did this because I was only given two IPs, and my roommate and I want to
connect four computers in my room to the internet.
I set up everything like the IPMasq HOWTO said, with the addition of a
route command on the linux box to tell it that it could directly access
192.168.38.*.
Everything works, but all the connections are very slow. When I ping from
192.168.38.2 to 128.210.195.1 (or any IP outside of 128.210.195.1), 50% of
the packets are dropped. (0% packet loss from 192.168.38.2 to
128.210.195.38)
Does anyone know why I'm getting such poor transfers through the IP
Masquerading?
Thanks,
David
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
