Linux-Networking Digest #251, Volume #10 Fri, 19 Feb 99 12:13:44 EST
Contents:
Re: printing to a NT-served printer from Linux (Jeff McWilliams)
Re: Q: 10BaseT - 100BaseTX coexistence ("Jeff Kowalczyk")
Re: MS Explorer 4.0 for Unix [LONG] (Peter Buelow)
Re: Why is winsock ppp more robust that pppd? (Chris Plachta)
Re: Ping problem (David Kirkpatrick)
Re: DNS Bind problem (Ben Frazier)
Redhat 5.2 and PPP ("Rocky Dean")
Re: MS Explorer 4.0 for Unix [LONG] ("Preston Crawford")
Re: MS Explorer 4.0 for Unix [LONG] ("Preston Crawford")
Need help with Intel Ether express pro 10 network card. ("mcv")
Re: tcpdump (Neil Cherry)
Re: MS Explorer 4.0 for Unix [LONG] (Rowan Volvo)
Re: Simple routing problem (Luca Filipozzi)
Re: NS Comm 4.5 not doing name lookup (Chuck Simmons)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jeff McWilliams)
Subject: Re: printing to a NT-served printer from Linux
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 16:47:02 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ashwin K. Raj wrote:
><!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
><html>
>Hi,
><p> We have an NT network in the lab, and I set up a Linux
>server (independently) on the same network. The Linux box has its own IP
>address and qualified domain name, and does not interfere with the NT network
>in any way. The NT server is a print server for a HP 4000N Network printer.
>Since the printer has its own IP address, I was trying to figure out a
>way to make the Linux box be able to print to this printer with or without
>(preferably) considering something like SAMBA. I was not able to find anything
>pertaining to this case in the HOWTOs, and I am hoping someone would be
>able to help me out and give me a head start on making this work.
><p> Someone please hear me! Thanks!
><p>Ashwin
><br>Educational Technology Lab
><br>University of Illinois at Chicago</html>
>
Here's my printcap:
lj4000|Remote printer entry:\
:lp=/dev/null:\
:rm=lj4000.acetech.int:\
:rp=raw:\
:sd=/var/spool/lpd/remote:\
:mx#0:\
:sh:
lj4000.acetech.int resolves to the ip address of the printer on our LAN.
You could just put the IP address in there.
Hope this helps
Jeff
------------------------------
From: "Jeff Kowalczyk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet
Subject: Re: Q: 10BaseT - 100BaseTX coexistence
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 11:45:23 -0500
Linksys has a great little hub that does this 10/100 sharing transparently.
You almost don't realized that its doing it, but it works.
------------------------------
From: Peter Buelow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,linux.redhat,linux.redhat.misc,comp.windows.x.kde
Subject: Re: MS Explorer 4.0 for Unix [LONG]
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 08:42:50 -0600
All or nothing? I beg to disagree. The beautiful thing about Linux, and the mass
of computer choices now is that there is no all or nothing argument any more. I
write HTML all the time. I write simpler HTML and leave the fancy stuff to CGI or
Java. And I write it in FP. Actually, let me clarify, I lay it out in FP and then
edit it in notepad, vi, or whatever text editor is handy. When you design a large
page, it is much easier if most of the tag layout is done for you, leaving some
cleanup and tweaking, but not the work involved in writing it all by hand, then the
cleanup and tweaking. Cutting steps is easy.
I don't knock any developer at this point. If you look at the mind boggling
amount of stuff out there, the best is written in a variety of ways, using a
variety of tools. Anyone who says that there is only one way to do it is really
pushing the limit in arrogance and close-minded thinking. I am a full time Linux
user in a sea of NT boxes, but I also have an NT box, and a laptop that has 98. I
would be a fool not to use what was available to me. My first page was written
entirely using vi. My second was also. They sucked. My pages are still not
professional, but that's ok, I'm not a professional web designer. It's a hobby. For
most people in this world, it's a hobby. Get past the better than thou attitude and
don't fault someone 'cause they think differently than you.
Peter Buelow
Bill Anderson wrote:
> Rowan Volvo wrote:
> >
> > In article <7a0ogd$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > Alexander Viro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > >OK, it's time for flame, kids.
> >
> > < --snip-- > been pissed about this for a long time, have we?
> >
> > >engine/style chosen by client. Get a decent textbook and read it (if you can
> > >read, that is).
> > >
> >
> > I'll bite, suggestions ?
> >
> > >>As for having a fscking idea of HTML, who in their right mind, that is a
> > >>serious web page creator, hand-writes HTML anymore?
> > >
>
> You should keep in mind that *most* gui tools do not actually write
> decent html, let alone html that fits the standard. Most of them emulate
> the stucture of a document, using all sorts of nasty, space-wasting
> elements.
>
> Clean html loads faster.
> FWIW, I prefer to use vim for writing html. It is easier than the
> unwashed gui-nauts are led to believe, which is fine with me. I can get
> more done using vi than using FP, HS, etc.. I have them, I don't use
> them anymore.
>
> Either you 'hand-write' html, or you do not write html period. There is
> no in between. Saying you write html, and using a wysiwys gui, is like
> saying you write a program by dragging some images in place in, say, VB.
>
> Bill
--
Peter Buelow
Motorola GSM/Bedrock
(847)632-6390
------------------------------
From: Chris Plachta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why is winsock ppp more robust that pppd?
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 08:53:12 -0800
Andrzej Filip wrote:
> Chris Plachta wrote:
>
> > I recently installed Redhat 5.1 and Win98 on my P166 in a dual-boot
> > configuration. I have a noisy phone line, and my pppd connection under
> > linux frequently disconnects, especially when I'm trying to download
> > large files. When I connect using PPP under Win98, I get a much more
> > robust connection. I am getting very frustrated with the disconnects and
> > I'm looking for any pointers on how to make my pppd connection more
> > robust.
> >
> > The command I've been using is:
> >
> > /usr/sbin/pppd connect \'/usr/sbin/chat -v -f connect_script defaultroute 115200
>crtscts user username debug /dev/modem
> >
> > When I disabled hardware flow control (i.e., changed "crtscts" to
> > "nocrtscts") it seemed to get better, but I still can't ftp large files
> > consistently with this connection.
> >
> > I'm looking for ways to make this connection more robust. Is there a way
> > to configure pppd in exactly the same way as in Win98? I've been able to
> > download large files much more reliably with my winsock PPP connection.
>
> 1) Check in %SystemRoot%\system32\ras\modem.inf (NT - I do not use W98)
> what commands W98 sends to your modem.
>
> 2) change /dev/modem to /dev/ttycua1 (com2)
>
/dev/modem is just a soft link to cua1.
> If you need more help send type of your modem, connect script you use
> and your /etc/ppp/options file.
>
>
I do not have an /etc/ppp/options file.
Here's what I've tried:
I looked at the modem.log file that gets generated whenever I connect in Win98, in
order to try to find the modem init
strings that it uses. Here is what gets generated when I connect:
Standard Modem in use.
Modem type: Standard Modem
Modem inf path: MDMGEN.INF
Modem inf section: Gen
115200,N,8,1
115200,N,8,1
Initializing modem.
Send: AT<cr>
Recv: AT<cr>
Recv: <cr><lf>OK<cr><lf>
Interpreted Response: Ok
Send: ATE0V1<cr>
Recv: ATE0V1<cr>
Recv: <cr><lf>OK<cr><lf>
Interpreted Response: Ok
Send: ATX4<cr>
Recv: <cr><lf>OK<cr><lf>
Interpreted Response: Ok
Dialing.
Send: ATDT#######<cr>
Recv: <cr>
Interpreted response: Informative
Recv: <lf>
Interpreted response: Informative
Recv: CONNECT 31200/ARQ
Interpreted response: Connect
Connection established at 31200bps.
Error-control on.
Data compression off or unknown.
So from this log, I gathered that the init sequence is:
AT OK ATE0V1 OK ATX4 OK ATDT#######
I added that to my connect-script, and I saw no improvements.
So again, here's the full command I'm using to connect:
/usr/sbin/pppd connect \'/usr/sbin/chat -v -f /etc/ppp/scripts/connect-script\'
defaultroute 115200 crtscts user username
debug /dev/modem
with connect-script containing:
ABORT BUSY ABORT 'NO CARRIER' '' AT OK ATE0V1 OK ATX4 OK ATDT####### Login: username
Password: \qpassword
I still can't download large files without disconnecting!!! This is really starting to
make me question my love for
linux....
As an editorial, I would like to comment on my mounting frustration with this Redhat
linux install. I get tired of hearing
all of the Windows-bashers out there constantly badmouthing every aspect of Windows,
and not conceding that Windows
definitely wins in the ease-of-installation category.
Believe me, I hate Microsoft as much as the next guy, but the fact of the matter is I
am having a lot of trouble getting
similar performance out of my linux installation in several instances. (I still have
not gotten my Xconfig right after weeks
of tinkering! Anyone who wants to bash Microsoft can help me get XFree86 configured
without flickering!).
------------------------------
From: David Kirkpatrick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Ping problem
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 11:21:42 +0000
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Looks like you have everything working so your probably pinging
places that will not respond to ping's = like microsoft. Try
boston.com they go up and down but are mostly up and will usually
respond.
d
Wes Hopkins wrote:
>
> Hello all,
>
> I've been going nuts over this problem with "ping". Somebody please
> enlighten me.
>
> Here's the skinny:
>
> I can ping any machine on my local network (192.168...) any machine on my
> ISP's network (@home) the
> @Home network (24.112...) but why can't I ping other stuff like
> www.microsoft.com (or microsoft's IP for that matter)
>
> I've got my ISP's DNS severs set up in resolv.conf, and I'm able to use the
> net through netscape, ftp,
> telnet, etc... but for some reason, I cannot ping.
>
> Any suggestions?
>
> Wes
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ben Frazier)
Subject: Re: DNS Bind problem
Date: 18 Feb 1999 16:44:53 GMT
On Thu, 18 Feb 1999 10:37:02 +0100,
Dominik Berner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> rambled about:
>Hi .
>
>I use Red Hat 5.2 and bind 8. I have created and configured bind with webmin
>( newest version ). So long, it works: with my second comp, the apache web
>server, I can jump in the internet without problems and can start my own
>homepage, too from a client win98 comp with inetexplorer.
>But if I start nslookup on my webserver, he can't find it.
>
>On my nameserver, my resolv.conf looks like that:
>domain c-i-s.net
>nameserver 127.0.0.1
>
>and on my webserver
>domain c-i-s.net
>nameserver x.x.x.x
>
Change the 127.0.0.1 in your resolv.conf to the IP address of that
machine.
--
ranger at chariott.com Ben Frazier ICQ# 1590690
http://members.chariott.com/~ranger
"There are two major products that come out of Berkeley: LSD and UNIX.
We don't believe this to be a coincidence." - Jeremy S. Anderson
------------------------------
From: "Rocky Dean" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,alt.os.linux.dial-up,comp.os.linux.questions
Subject: Redhat 5.2 and PPP
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 12:12:06 -0500
I installed Redhat 5.2 on 2 different machines. I had it install dialup
support. when i type dmesg, I see that PPP loaded correctly. I edited the
ppp-on script to use my modem port. I can dial out fine with minicom, but
can't connect to my ISP with it. when I try to run ppp-on, nothing happens.
I type ps and see that pppd and chat are both running, but it doesn't try to
dial out of my modem or anything. this exact problem is happening on both
PCs. I've used ppp-on with an older version of slackware before fine. does
anyone know if this is some kind of bug with Redhat 5.2??? or if there is
some other steps that I must take first? i've also tried loading X and then
using the system configuration, created a ppp profile, and when i click the
connect button, nothing at all happens, it doesn't even run anything. when i
type ps, nothing has changed.
Thanks,
Rocky
------------------------------
From: "Preston Crawford" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,linux.redhat.misc,comp.windows.x.kde
Subject: Re: MS Explorer 4.0 for Unix [LONG]
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 09:04:12 -0700
Steven M. Scotten wrote in message ...
>I think neither of the "all-or-nothing" positions in this argument are
>even close to right. If you stick tight to the published standards
>without any regard for existing implementation, you're going to end up
>with web pages that don't work in *any* browser. Even the vaunted
That's exactly my point. It would be a beautiful world if we could actually
publish to a standard and have those pages work, but that just isn't
realistic.
>stick one's head in the sand and keep shouting "it conforms to the
>spec" while the rest of the world is wondering what your site is
>supposed to be about.
Exactly.
>So what does this have to do linux, redhat linux, kde, or networking
>with linux?
Not much. This argument got started by someone ranting like a blathering
idiot about how much he hated web developers who don't follow the standard.
That's when I jumped in.
Back to Linux.
Preston
------------------------------
From: "Preston Crawford" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,linux.redhat.misc,comp.windows.x.kde
Subject: Re: MS Explorer 4.0 for Unix [LONG]
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 09:05:30 -0700
Arthur Corliss wrote in message ...
>done, adhering to existing standards. And think of this, twit, you're
Why are you assuming that I'm pushing the fragmented standard??? Did I say
that??? I develop to the lowest common denominator personally. I've run log
files and at most companies I work 98% of the browsers are Netscape 3+ or IE
3+ so that tends to be what I develop for.
>developers demanded compliance. The proprietary nonsense is only useful
for
>controlled environments, particularly when you know all browsers meet/are
the
>corporate standard.
Thanks for the lecture. Now stop taking this argument to the other extreme,
because I wasn't talking about proprietary "nonsense." I was talking about
the FACT that web browsers render basic HTML and JavaScript differently so
you have to learn to adjust to these implementations rather than strictly
adhering to the standard.
Preston
------------------------------
From: "mcv" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Need help with Intel Ether express pro 10 network card.
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 17:20:26 -0000
Hi,
I can`t get RedHat Linux 5.1 to find my Intel Ether Express pro 10 network
card. Win95 finds the card with no problem.
Set-up says I might have to give some parameters to the set-up program to
get the card working...any ideas?
Cheers,
Mark.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Neil Cherry)
Subject: Re: tcpdump
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 16:26:32 GMT
On Thu, 18 Feb 1999 14:11:08 +0200, Ahmed Said wrote:
>hi there,
>
> does anyone know where i could get some documentation on the
>tcpdump source code.
try man tcpdump, it's really pretty good. I also recommend getting
tcpshow use both and you can see the same info in 2 different ways. I
usually do something like this:
tcpdump -s 1500 -f -n -i eth0 -w 0213.b &
Which captures the entire packet (-s 1500) doesn't convert the name to
ip addresses (-f -n) uses the second ethernet card (-i eth0) and saves
it to the file 0213.b (-w 0213). I run it in the background.
I then shutdown the interface and it stops immediately (you could kill
it with a SIGHUP also). I then use the following command to read the
file and save it to foo.0213.b.
tcpdump -s 1500 -n -r 0213.a -vvv >foo.0213.b
Read the man page, it has a lot of useful info that will explain
things to a point (you may need to read the RFC for further info).I
hope this helps.
--
Linux Home Automation Neil Cherry [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://members.home.net/ncherry (Text only)
http://meltingpot.fortunecity.com/lightsey/52 (Graphics)
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
alt.os.linux,alt.linux,linux.redhat,linux.redhat.misc,comp.windows.x.kde
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rowan Volvo)
Subject: Re: MS Explorer 4.0 for Unix [LONG]
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 16:53:29 GMT
In article <7a0ogd$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Alexander Viro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>OK, it's time for flame, kids.
< --snip-- > been pissed about this for a long time, have we?
>engine/style chosen by client. Get a decent textbook and read it (if you can
>read, that is).
>
I'll bite, suggestions ?
>>As for having a fscking idea of HTML, who in their right mind, that is a
>>serious web page creator, hand-writes HTML anymore?
>
this guy should realize that you at least want to check the code that
your web editor spits out- trim the extraneous backspaces at least.
>--
>"You're one of those condescending Unix computer users!"
>"Here's a nickel, kid. Get yourself a better computer" - Dilbert.
--
Never fly in an airplane that was designed by an optimist
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Luca Filipozzi)
Subject: Re: Simple routing problem
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 09:44:18 -0800
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> <!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
> <html>
>
> <br>I'm trying to use a Linux machine as a router to implement a second
> segment
> <br>of our network. We have always used a netmask of 255.255.255.224,
> allowing
> <br>us to have 8 subnets, but so far we have only been using 250.21.53.2
> - 31.
> <br>(NOTE: High bytes of IP Addresses have been altered for confidentiality).
> <p>The Linux machine has two ethernet cards configured with 250.21.53.30
> and
> <br>205.201.53.193 to try and put the 250.21.53.192/27 network behind the
> Linux
> <br>machine, so it routes traffic between its two interfaces.
>
><p><tt>
> ---------- 53.194</tt>
> <br><tt> 53.1
> h |
>53.30
> 53.193 h |</tt>
> <br><tt> ISP ---------- u |------------- Linux --------------
> u |---------- 53.195</tt>
>
><br><tt>
> b
>|
> b |</tt>
>
><br><tt>
> ---------- ...</tt>
> <p>Here is what works:
> <p> 1) The Linux machine can establish connections with both internal
> and
> <br> external hosts. By "internal", I mean
> the network behind the Linux
> <br> machine, even though I want those addresses
> to be public.
> <p> 2) Internal and external machines can ping both the internal
> and external
> <br> INTERFACES of the Linux machine (i.e., 53.30
> and 53.193), and everybody
> <br> gets ping replies back.
> <p> 3) My OUTBOUND requests get forwarded through the Linux machine
> to external
> <br> internet hosts. I can see responses
> to my requests (telnet ACKs,
> <br> ping replies) coming in on the Linux machine's
> external interface.
> <br>
> <p>Here is what doesn't work:
> <p> 1) I can't ping the internal network from outside the Linux box.
> <p> 2) The INBOUND replies to my internal hosts' requests don't get
> forwarded
> <br> from the external Linux interface to the internal
> network.
> <br>
> <p>I do not think that this is a problem with enabling forwarding in the
> kernel,
> <br>based on the fact that packets are successfully forwarded in an outbound
> <br>direction, and based on the following:
> <p> bash$ cat /proc/net/ip_forward
> <br> IP firewall forward rules, default 4
> <p> bash$ /sbin/ipfwadm -F -l
> <br> IP firewall forward rules, default policy: accept
> <br>
> <p>I have configured addresses and routing tables to the best of my
> <br>understanding, and although the Linux machine is able to communicate
> with
> <br>both the internet and its "internal" network, the internal network
> is not
> <br>accessible from outside the Linux router, and consequently is not able
> to
> <br>receive responses to its requests. Here is the routing table
> from the
> <br>Linux box:
> <p><tt> bash$ /sbin/route</tt>
> <br><tt> Kernel IP routing table</tt>
> <br><tt> Destination Gateway
> Genmask Flags Metric
>Ref
> Use Iface</tt>
> <br><tt> 250.21.53.0
>*
> 255.255.255.224 U 0
> 0 64 eth0</tt>
> <br><tt> 250.21.53.192
>*
> 255.255.255.224 U 0
> 0 6 eth1</tt>
> <br><tt> 127.0.0.0
>*
> 255.0.0.0 U
> 0 0 48
> lo</tt>
> <br><tt> default
> *
>0.0.0.0
> U 0
>0
> 412 eth0</tt>
> <br>
> <br>
> <p>Here is the routing table from a machine on the "internal" network
> <br>(I want this to be publicly accessible):
> <p><tt> bash$ /sbin/route</tt>
> <br><tt> Kernel IP routing table</tt>
> <br><tt> Destination
>Gateway
> Genmask Flags Metric Ref
> Use Iface</tt>
> <br><tt> 250.21.53.192
>*
> 255.255.255.224 U 0
> 0 12 eth0</tt>
> <br><tt> 127.0.0.0
> *
> 255.0.0.0 U
> 0 0 2 lo</tt>
> <br><tt> default
> 250.21.53.193 0.0.0.0
>UG
> 0 0 124 eth0</tt>
> <br>
> <br>
> <p>By using tcpdump to monitor both interfaces on the Linux router, I can
> see
> <br>OUTBOUND requests being forwarded very nicely. The internet hosts
> respond
> <br>to the queries and send responses back (e.g., a telnet ACK or a ping
> reply),
> <br>which I can see on the external interface of the Linux router, but
> they are
> <br>not forwarded to the internal interface. It is as though the
> Linux router
> <br>does not recognize that it is responsible for forwarding those packets
> to
> <br>its internal interface.
> <p>Another thing I've noticed with tcpdump is that routed seems to be behaving
> <br>nicely on the Linux machine. It sends RIP broadcasts to both
> the internal
> <br>and external networks.
> <p>I also see ARP requests coming from my ISP's router, at 250.21.53.1,
> <br>asking who-has the addresses for machines behind the Linux machine,
> such as
> <p> 09:42:49.431816 arp who-has 250.21.53.194 tell 250.21.53.1
> <br>
> <p>Nobody answers these ARP requests. When I manually send an ARP
> message to
> <br>the router from the Linux machine, and tell it the hardware address
> of the
> <br>"internal" machine...
> <p> arp -s 250.21.53.194 00:11:1A:6E:7E:14 pub
> <br>
> <p>...it stops asking who-has, but this does not enable delivery of packets
> <br>to the internal machines. I figure this is another symptom that
> <br>something is wrong with the routing tables or with routed, and that
> I should
> <br>not have needed to do it, and that it only solved part of the problem.
> <p>I suspect that I have overlooked something that an experienced network
> <br>administrator could point out by looking at the routing tables and
> the
> <br>traces of network traffic on the two interfaces. If you have
> any suggestions
> <br>for what I should look for, I would greatly appreciate your advice.
> <p>--Andrew Mickish
> <br> [EMAIL PROTECTED]</html>
>
>
Please don't post with HTML as your default formatting.
Your routing tables on the linux box and on the internal network are
fine. It's the ISP's router that's not set up right. It receives a packet
from the Internet whose destination address is for one of the "internal"
machines. It doesn't know that for a certain range of IP addresses it
needs to send the packet to the linux box. So it asks for the MAC address
(via arp) and doesn't hear a reply so it drops the packet.
When you tell it the MAC address of the internal machine, it still can't
find the machine! You need to do one of three things:
1) get the ISP to change the routing table on their router
2) make the 53.30 interface on the linux box have aliases for 53.194 etc
then use port forwarding.... don't know if this will work
the linux box will think IT is 53.194 and won't forward to the REAL
53.194!!
3) make 53.30 issue arps for 53.194 etc with the 53.30 mac address
so the packet will arrive at the linux box... then routing takes over
In my opinion, 1) is best, 2) won't work, and 3) should work if you can't
do 1).
BTW, what's wrong with us using NAT (one-for-one address
translation)? It's not limiting like IP masquerade 'cause the only thing
that NAT does is change the IP addresses and not the ports. So all the
traffic gets through correctly. All the machines are still fully visible
to the Internet.
Hope this helps,
Luca
--
Luca Filipozzi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: Chuck Simmons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: netscape.public.general,netscape.communicator.unix
Subject: Re: NS Comm 4.5 not doing name lookup
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 09:37:25 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Daren Scot Wilson wrote:
>
> Magically healed! Now the browser can go to www.anyplace.org, though I'm not
> sure why. Played with some /etc files, rebooted, tried again and no good.
> Then just a few minutes ago, removed some comments from /etc/hosts, just
> cleaning up, then a minute later clicked on a link in an email, and voila!
>
> Do /etc/hosts files not allow comments? That's the only thing I can think of
> to explain this miraculous healing. All the other /etc files having to do
> with networking have lines starting with # which are obviously comments, I just
> assumed hosts, too, could have these.
> --
> Daren Scot Wilson
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> www.newcolor.com
I thought it did and mine has one comment. It is the last line, however,
commenting out a host I don't need but the comment line is working just
fine. The commented out host is now looked up with DNS and the hosts
above in the file are localnet hosts and they all answer just fine. I
also have several comments in /etc/resolv.conf - I switch name servers
when I detect dead ones on the fly and my shell scripts that do it
always use commented files for replacement (helps me remember what I've
done).
Chuck
--
... The times have been,
That, when the brains were out,
the man would die. ... Macbeth
Chuck Simmons [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Chuck's Place http://www.futureone.com/~chrlsim/
Dynamic IP Web Page http://www.futureone.com/~chrlsim/cantor.html
Unofficial Netscape FAQ http://www.ufaq.org/
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
