Linux-Networking Digest #333, Volume #10 Sun, 28 Feb 99 14:14:01 EST
Contents:
Re: WinNT4 and Linux/Firewall Problem ("Leopold Toetsch")
DSL linux net unreachable, 98 net reachable (Glenn Graham)
Re: pppd LCP problem with kernel 2.2 (Clifford Kite)
Linux workgroup ("Joven (Another Linux User!)")
Re: wuftpd dies went "ls" (Jayasuthan)
Re: UDP Packets and VPN routing ("LP")
Re: PPP Just Stopped Working (David Kirkpatrick)
Re: Linux Users in Houston TX ("Rick Carlson")
Re: domain with remote hosts? (Gut)
IBM PCI TokenRing ("Kenneth Petersen")
Re: Sendmail Configuration uses wrong domain name ("David Travers")
Re: Detecting second ethernet trouble (Stephen Anderson)
Re: Linux workgroup (Benjohn007)
IP Masquerading and IE4 on NT ("Roger Lipscombe")
Re: D-Link DFE530-TX not working with tulip.o ("R.H.")
Re: Ping return request timed out from Win95 to Linux (David Kirkpatrick)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Leopold Toetsch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: WinNT4 and Linux/Firewall Problem
Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 16:37:30 +0100
Hi Heiko,
Heiko Brachmann wrote in message <7bbmeq$sp8$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>Hello,
>
>I've got a linux-box (SuSE 6.0) configured as a firewall to establish
>internet-connection for my windows NT 4.0 (ServicePack 4) clients.
>Everything seems to work find, but whenever a NT-box is switched on the
>firewall tries to connect to my ISP's (T-Online) nameserver. Additionally
>the clients try the same nameserver-connect every two hours (not exactly 2
>hours, but nearly). I deactivated every service of the NT-client but the
>connect kept staying.
>
>What is the reason for these behavior and what can I do to get rid of it ?
>
I have exactly the same configuration and had similar problems.
1. check your /etc/hosts file, put every machine in there.
2. /etc/host.conf:
order hosts bind
3. If you have still DNS-lookups (as I had when reading mail or news with
Outlook Express) setup a Nameserver.
More about this is on
http://toetsch.at/de/tips/linux/99/07_5.htm#dns
or with frames
http://toetsch.at/de/tips/index.html?linux/99/07_5.htm#dns
Hope this helps
leo
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Glenn Graham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: DSL linux net unreachable, 98 net reachable
Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 14:52:09 GMT
My ISP gave me the following settings:
ip address: 10.160.16.42
mask: 255.255.255.248
gateway: 10.160.0.1
Under windows 98 if I use these settings I am able to get to the net.
If under Linux I use these settings the linux box cant even ping 10.160.0.1
I did a netstat -r under windows 98 to see what routes it was using and I got
this
Active Routes:
Network Address Netmask Gateway Address Interface Metric
0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.160.0.1 10.160.16.42 1
10.160.16.40 255.255.255.248 10.160.16.42 10.160.16.42 1
10.160.16.42 255.255.255.255 127.0.0.1 127.0.0.1 1
10.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 10.160.16.42 10.160.16.42 1
127.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 127.0.0.1 127.0.0.1 1
224.0.0.0 224.0.0.0 10.160.16.42 10.160.16.42 1
255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 10.160.16.42 0.0.0.0 1
Route Table
Active Connections
Proto Local Address Foreign Address State
Does anyone know what routes I need to do to linux to get it to do the same
thing as windows98?
Under linux I can ping myself and another 98 box connected as 10.160.16.43 so
I'm assuming that all is well with the network card etc.
Thanks in advance
Glenn
============= Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ============
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Clifford Kite)
Crossposted-To: comp.protocols.ppp
Subject: Re: pppd LCP problem with kernel 2.2
Date: 28 Feb 1999 10:26:58 -0600
Andreas Grabner ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: Hi
: After I update my kernel to 2.2.x and pppd to 2.3.5 i can' t connect to
: my ISP when I boot kernel 2.2.
: when i boot 2.0.35 it works.
You connect OK. Both pppd and the ISP are sending, pppd understands
the ISP, but either the ISP doesn't get anything pppd sends or doesn't
understand what it gets.
One thing to check is the setserial command in the /etc/rc.* boot-up
files. The UART type specified must agree with the actual type of UART
that the modem uses.
Another thing is the configuration of the modem itself. This is likely
to be your problem and there is another comment about it below.
: heres my log:
<snip>
: Feb 27 22:21:57 film chat[438]: CONNECT
: Feb 27 22:21:57 film chat[438]: -- got it
: Feb 27 22:21:57 film chat[438]: send (\d)
: Feb 27 22:21:58 film chat[438]: expect (sername:)
: Feb 27 22:21:58 film chat[438]: 115200^M
Here is something strange. No ordinary modem can send or receive at
115200 bit/sec over the usual PPP connection except with help from modem
compression and error correction. Connecting at that speed, specified by
the pppd option, very likely means that no error correction or compression
is configured in the modem itself.
<snip>
: an my options (i tryed a lot of other)
: /dev/ttyS2
: 115200
: crtscts
: modem
: debug
: defaultroute
: asyncmap 0
: (lcp-restart 2)
--
Clifford Kite <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Not a guru. (tm)
/* I gave up on politics when no matter who I voted for, I regretted it.
* -- Pepper...and Salt, WSJ */
------------------------------
From: "Joven (Another Linux User!)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Linux workgroup
Date: Mon, 01 Mar 1999 00:55:05 +0800
What can I set up Linux as workgroup so other Win95 client can see my
Linux under network nebourhoot?
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 01 Mar 1999 01:32:22 -0800
From: Jayasuthan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: wuftpd dies went "ls"
Pls upgrade newer wu-ftp server from the org site..... there is some bug
in slackware dist.... some file missing...
BYe
L J Bayuk wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >I'm experiencing the same problems with wu.ftpd. I'm running Slackware
> >Linux v3.5 with the 2.1.115 kernel (upgrade to the kernel is coming).
> >The version of wu-ftpd I'm using is:
> >
> > wu-2.4.2-academ[BETA-18-VR13]
> >
> >Connecting to the FTP server is fine, but then, when a 'ls' or a 'get'
> >is issued, the connection is closed and the following appears in
> >/var/adm/messages:
> >
> > Feb 25 22:37:11 jacket ftpd[8761]: exiting on signal 11
> >
> >If anyone else is experiencing this problem, please let me know
> >([EMAIL PROTECTED]) if there is a solution.
>
> Is it only on anonymous FTP? If so, maybe the static-linked
> binary for ~ftp/bin/ls was linked with libraries that are not
> compatible with your upgraded kernel.
--
#include <linux/geek.h>
<----|
I run around LAN for 10 Hours....
Surf WAN for 4 hours and........
play on localhost for 3 hours !
Is this mean I am qualify to become a GEEK !
|---->
"The sky looks blue but it is not"
---> Don't see things and believe <-----
------------------------------
From: "LP" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: UDP Packets and VPN routing
Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 17:19:04 GMT
Chris Tenney wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>I have a win98 machine and at my store we have our NT server and win98
>machines behind a linux firewall which also does our DHCP and DNS. Right
>now I can't get in. We are on cable modems on the same segment. Before
the
>linux box we were just like a LAN. We all showed up in the same workgroup
>even though the server was at the store and I was at my home office. It
was
>like being at the store at my office PC.
I have a similar configuration, except the linux firewall is connected to a
slow 56K leased line. If you set your WINS server correctly on the home
computer and allow WINS traffic through the firewall at work (port 137 UDP I
think?), then you should still all be in the same workgroup :)
>
>A partner is going to build me a box for my home office and use 128 bit
>encrypted VPN to tunnel into the store linux box so I can gain access to
the
>network again.
You should note that some cable modem companies (i.e. TCI @Home) are
considering altering their subscriber agreement to prohibit Microsoft PPTP -
possibly other tunnelling protocols. I don't know how much they will
enforce this, but its always good to know...
>
>I am very new at linux. I was told that this OS can't send and receive UDP
>packets and other things that a win98 machine takes for granted. So
playing
>games like unreal is not possible, or ICQ, etc. This would be a problem
>since I have mult. win98 machines and kids.
:) Linux's IP Stack can hande many more protocols than Win98 - certainly
UDP. If the Linux firewall is not doing IP Masquerading, then you just need
to configure its IP Packet filtering to not block the UDP ports needed by
the game. Linux can act as a transparent router an allow just about
anything through. People at work currently can use ICQ as usual through the
firewall. I haven't tried playing any games yet, but I'm sure they will
work.
>
>Can a hub attached to a cable modem and win98 machines have a linux box
>added to the hub and then when I want to VPN to the store's box....set my
>VPN on win98 to route through the linux box and then out across the web to
>the store's linux box or will I have to put the machines directly behind
the
>linux box and loose some of the full function of the apps. on the WWW.
Unless your Cable ISP is providing you with multpile IP Addresses (which
@Home in some areas will for an extra fee), the linux box will need to
Masquerade all your traffic - both computers cannot be connected to the
internet at the same time. IP Masquerading is very advanced in the latest
Linux kernel, however it definitely takes some work to get games going
behind a Masqueraded firewall!
I assume that the 128bit VPN Tunnel is going between Linux boxes and NOT
from your Win98 machine (i.e. it is not using Microsoft PPTP). I've never
actually set one of these up, but I have a feeling it probably works better
than PPTP. I'd be interested in how it is set up.
Perhaps a better configuration is to poke a hole in the firewall for
whatever services you want to do inside. Linux will allow you to let ONLY
traffic through the firewall from a particular IP Address (I.e. your home
computer's) on a particular protocol / port (i.e. the SMB TCP and UDP
ports). Since win95/98 really only support one tunnelling protocol
(MS-PPTP) and you have only one IP Address at home, the easiest
configuration would be to poke a hole through the firewall for that IP
Address.
-LP
------------------------------
From: David Kirkpatrick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: PPP Just Stopped Working
Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 12:20:35 +0000
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Clifford,
What release are you grepping in? I could not find the
references you mentioned in the file in /usr/doc/ppp-2.3.5/pppd -
I could not find that file. What is the reverence of *.phc] ?
does this mean you looked through all the dot h and dot c files?
My system does not contain a sys-linux.c either. What
release are y ou looking in?
I have loaded RH 5.2.
Clifford Kite wrote:
>
> Charles Stack ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
> : I've been trying to track down the source of a bug with my PPP box. Without
>
> : My /var/log/messages looks like:
>
> : Feb 26 22:50:50 picard pppd[398]: write warning: Inut/output error(5)
> : Feb 26 22:50:50 picard pppd[398]: write warning: Inut/output error(5)
> : Feb 26 22:50:50 picard pppd[398]: ioctl(PPPIOCSASYNCMAP): Input/Ouput
> : error(5)
>
> A quick grep through the *.[hc] files in ppp-2.3.5/pppd shows that this
> message comes from sys-linux.c. A look at the code shows it occurs when
> there's an error setting the transmit asyncmap. I've no idea what would
> cause such an error though.
>
> --
> Clifford Kite <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Not a guru. (tm)
> /* Those who can't write, write manuals. */
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Rick Carlson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Linux Users in Houston TX
Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 12:12:55 -0600
I just started learning Linux this week.
I am attempting to convert an accounting software package (which I wrote 10
years ago) from QNX to Linux.
It uses a 3GL B-Tree database system using hard-coded C record structures.
I can transfer the source code using Kermit, but I would appreciate
suggestions for
the database back end.
Keep in mind that this is a commercial application, and the owner will not
distribute soruce code, so I have to remain compliant with the Gnu Library
Public License.
Anyone know which database package (yes, I am using Red Hat, version 5.2) I
should use? I would prefer not to convert to SQL for the first version.
I suppose I could purchase the FairCom C-TREE development system for $900
and convert the source to Linux, but I would prefer to use something already
written for and tested under Linux.
Remove the obvious anti-spam text from my E-mail if you respond privately.
Thanks.
Rick
James Mitchell wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>I've just picked up on the tail end of this thread.... so I don't know
>what it's about. If it's worth anything, there is a new LUG at Rice
>University.
>
>http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~rlug/
>
>
>--
> ^-^ - James Mitchell
> (O O) 713/630.8310 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ( v ) JIBA! http://www.owlnet.rice.edu/~jwmitch/
>---m-m---------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
From: Gut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: domain with remote hosts?
Date: 28 Feb 1999 15:31:29 GMT
I don't mind messing with DNS, I just don't know exactly how to do it.
We don't really care if we totally screw things up. It is not a business
domain... it's for personal use. The more we screw up, the more we learn.
But thanks for the warning :)
Gut
Juergen Heinzl wrote:
> In article <7b9p8r$2na$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> >What are you talking about???
>
> I guess it's I who's meant ...
>
> >It was an example.. I didn't want to advertise her domain in the
newsgroup!
> >She did tell me I could, so I didn't. I made up the domain blah.net as
a
> >example... Her's is something totally different.
>
> ... yes. Might be I got you wrong (?). Okay, assuming she *is*
authoritative
> for a certain zone, foobar.net and you want to be visible via ...
> nslookup yourmachine.foobar.net
> ... too I cannot see a problem (she really should know) some confusion
aside,
> since a reverse DNS lookup will lead to *two* different results for some
> time, depending which NS responds. In other words using the same address
for
> two different FQDN's just for fun ... you must not do that either 8)
>
> In addition there is a MX record, for instance, for foobar.net ... now
mail
> sent to your machine will go to the mail exchanger for foobar.net of
course
> and so on and so on.
>
> In other words, please do not mess around with the DNS, it might result
in
> things you cannot say anything about yet.
> Juergen
>
> --
> \ Real name : J�rgen Heinzl \ no flames /
> \ EMail Private : [EMAIL PROTECTED] \ send money instead /
> \ Phone Private : +44 181-332 0750 \ /
================== Posted via SearchLinux ==================
http://www.searchlinux.com
------------------------------
From: "Kenneth Petersen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: IBM PCI TokenRing
Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 19:28:13 -0000
How do i setup my Linus RedHat 5.2 to work with my IBM PCI TokenRing
adapter.
Kindly Kenneth PEtersen
------------------------------
From: "David Travers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Sendmail Configuration uses wrong domain name
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 23:02:47 -0000
The rc.config file in Suse is a global configuration file for the whole
system. It defines all the parameters which are passed to all the system
wide programs such as sendmail, samba etc.
By changing the settings in this file and then running a program SuSEconfig,
all other configuration files are modified correctly.
Allows easier system admin than Redhat, but that is my subjective view. I
have tried both distributions and find Suse at a lot easier to work with.
Note: I also solved the problem with sendmail. You were right about the
/etc/hosts entry. I created the entry in /etc/hosts for blairs.co.uk, and
sendmail now picks this up a local host from the settings of
SENDMAIL_ALIASES in /etc/rc.config.
Thanks for the tip.
------------------------------
From: Stephen Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Detecting second ethernet trouble
Date: 28 Feb 1999 18:26:50 GMT
I found the solution! Thanks for your help! In order to get both network cards
working, I had to specify both network cards in the append line. Not only that, but I
had to reverse the order of which card was eth0 and which was eth1. Perhaps these
would be good things to add to the multiple ethernet mini HOWTO. Thanks again for all
your help!
Steve
Rick Onanian wrote:
> Stephen Anderson wrote:
> >
> > I am running Linux 2.2.2 (Reddat) and having trouble detecting a second ethernet
>adapter. My system (Dell OptiPlex something-or-other) has an on-board 3C509 ethernet
>chip. I then placed a 3C905 ethernet card in one of the PCI slots. Linux
>automatically detects and configures the 3C905 (card) but it does not see the
>on-board 3C509. I have compiled both 90X and 509 drivers into the kernel. I have
>used their (3Com) Etherdisk utilities to detect both cards without any trouble. The
>905 is IRQ 11 and IO of FC80 (or something like that). The 509 (not-working) is
>detected at IRQ 10 with a base address of 250. So I went into my lilo.conf and added:
> >
> > append="ether=10,0x250,eth1"
>
> I believe you have to put both cards in the append line. Also, I did not
> put the irq and IO for mine, just 0,0 and it worked for me. You may want
> to check the multiple-ethernet FAQ at:
> http://cesdis.gsfc.nasa.gov/linux/misc/multicard.html
>
> <snippage>
>
> rick - a guy in search of raw (ISO) cd images of SuSE and Slackware
> ---------------
> My opinions don't exist, and as such, are not anyone elses. I do not
> represent
> anyone, not even myself, and especially not my employer. Cows go moo.
> ---
> Looking for a 1968 Camaro SS convertible, black interior, beat-up
> rustbucket
> that is in need of a lot of restoration and TLC. Must be cheap...I'm
> broke.
> ---
> Reply to me at either thc <at sign here> psynet <dot> net or
> rick <at sign> mail <dot> artmold <dot> com
================== Posted via SearchLinux ==================
http://www.searchlinux.com
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Benjohn007)
Subject: Re: Linux workgroup
Date: 28 Feb 1999 18:40:33 GMT
use Samba,
http://samba.org
it should come with most linux cdroms
------------------------------
From: "Roger Lipscombe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: IP Masquerading and IE4 on NT
Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 18:35:09 -0000
Hi,
I've just set up my Linux box to provide IP masquerading. It all works
fine, except when I try to grab files using IE (running on my NT box).
IE gets the file size completely wrong, and claims that I've got about 60
hours to go to do the download.
This problem only occurs when the files are on http servers. ftp works
completely correctly, and downloading HTML pages works OK.
In fact, everything else seems OK - I'm using the masquerading link now to
post this news, and ICQ works. Just not http downloads.
It works OK with a couple of sites. I was wondering if anyone had seen this
problem and can point me at any possible mistakes I've made when setting up
masquerading.
FYI: I'm running the 2.2.1 kernel.
------------------------------
From: "R.H." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: D-Link DFE530-TX not working with tulip.o
Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 09:11:44 -0800
R.H. wrote:
> teacup wrote:
>
> > I have a very stupid question here:
> >
> > After download the via-rhine.c file, what should I do next ?
> >
> > Please help ... Thanks !
> >
> > - Min
>
> I have a similiar question as I have the same DFE-530TX ethernet card.
> I downloaded the via-rhine.c and compiled it to via-rhine.o and put it
> in its directory with the other modules as specified in the document
> Using Linux Network Device Drivers as Modules. I did an insmod
> via-rhine, but linux still comes up with Eth0 unknown device. Any
> help would be appreciated.
>
> Thanks,
> Roger
Never mind, I figured it out myself. I put the insmod in the rc.modules
instead of the rc.local and now when I reboot it detects my card and I
can ping to my other computer.
Roger
------------------------------
From: David Kirkpatrick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Ping return request timed out from Win95 to Linux
Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 13:58:19 +0000
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Have you setup /etc/hosts, lmhosts and networks? See NET-3-HOWTO
* Config-HOWTO.
Tapas Guha wrote:
>
> I am trying to put together one Linux machine and one Windows95 machine
> in a same network. In network there is no other node exist. When I try
> to ping from either machine to other one it responds with timed out.
> When both machine are in linux works fine. Following is the network
> details of both machine.
>
> Node 1. Redhat Linux 5.2
> IP- 90.33.212.11
> Subnet : 255.255.252.0
>
> Node 2. Windows 95
> IP - 90.33.212.12
> Subnet : 255.255.252.0
> Any suggestion & clue is welcome. If anyone can help me by indicating
> some documentation about connecting Dos/Windows machine with Linux that
> will help. (Ex HOWTO & so on).
> Email - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[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
******************************
