Linux-Networking Digest #734, Volume #10 Sat, 3 Apr 99 19:13:42 EST
Contents:
Re: please stress-test my site (Michael John Erskine)
Re: multiple masquerading (Greg Weeks)
re:ppp with slackware (Richard Stevens)
Re: diald and DNS queries (Ronald Hovens)
Re: can't locate module net-pf-4 (Bob Martin)
Re: Hacker Attack and identd (Michael John Erskine)
Re: newbie and Pingaling Prob?? (Michael John Erskine)
Re: Network problem!! Please HELP! (Michael John Erskine)
Re: no enough ip address ! (Michael John Erskine)
Re: IP forwarding situation (Michael John Erskine)
Re: HELP!! Final attempt at Samba installation (Michael John Erskine)
Re: Help! DNS Error using RedHat 5.2 and named! (Michael John Erskine)
Re: IP Forwarding Configuration (Rien Broekstra)
Re: Where can I find TCPDUMP for linux? ("Massimiliano Ciancio")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 13:04:03 -0500
From: Michael John Erskine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux
Subject: Re: please stress-test my site
Eugene I would be happy to get a brief synopsis of the results of this
test. What hardware what sort of performance... how fast the
connection etc...
-m-
Eugene wrote:
> Hi everybody,
>
> I would appreciate it if you could stress-test my site,
> www.happypenguin.dhs.org
> Try www, ftp, etc. (just don't spam me ok :)
>
> thanks,
>
> Eugene
>
> --
> "Ein Folk, ein Reich, ein Fuhrer" - Adolf Hitler
> "One World, one Web, one Program" - Microsoft's slogan
--
Michael Erskine, Simply Computers!, Urbanna, Virginia, 804-758-3793
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-----------== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
http://www.newsfeeds.com/ The Largest Usenet Servers in the World!
=========== Over 72,000 Groups, Plus Dedicated Binaries Servers ==========
------------------------------
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Greg Weeks)
Subject: Re: multiple masquerading
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1999 15:38:11 -0600
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christoph H.) writes:
> Hi!
>
> I have now been searching for 1 month about multiple masquerading but
> I can't find anything useful.
>
> ALL I WANT is to masquerade 3 internal networks through 3 different
> official IP-addresses (3 aliases on the masquerading-router).
>
> e.g.
>
> router itself: 60.10.20.50
>
> 3 times masquerading:
>
> 192.168.1.0/24 --> 60.10.20.51
> 192.168.2.0/24 --> 60.10.20.52
> 192.168.3.0/24 --> 60.10.20.53
>
> 60.10.20.x addresses are examples.
>
> I experimentated with IPCHAINS and IPROUTE2, but it was not possible
> to do such a configuration!
>
> PLEASE HELP ME!
> I COULDN'T BELIEVE THAT NOBODY EVER TRIED A CONFIGURATION LIKE THAT!
I'm pretty sure I could issue the commands with ipfwadm. I'm not sure
they would work. You could always use three machines to do the
masqing. I've yet to try ipchains. This is not something I've seen
anyone talking about either. You will have to set the aliasing and
routing up first. Hmm, I think the routing might be a problem. What's
wrong with three machines, or all three internal networks masqed onto
a single IP address?
Greg Weeks
--
http://durendal.tzo.com/greg/
------------------------------
From: Richard Stevens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: re:ppp with slackware
Date: Sun, 04 Apr 1999 00:15:21 +0100
I wonder if anyone can help me. Iam trying to connect to my isp using
ppsetup. I have used the program to my knowledge in the right way. But
when i type ppp-go, it just goes back to the command prompt and nothing
happens. any help would be appreciated!!!
Richard
------------------------------
From: Ronald Hovens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: diald and DNS queries
Date: Sat, 03 Apr 1999 22:11:01 +0200
That didn't work! The rule for port 53 is still hit
(accept udp 30 udp.dest=udp.domain)
If you have a working setup, can you send me your diald.conf?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Make sure samba has your correct work group and proper domain controler
>
> Make sure the following is in diald.conf
>
> # Do the same for netbios-ns broadcasts
> # NOTE: your /etc/services file may not define the netbios services
> # in which case you should comment out the next lines.
> ignore tcp tcp.source=tcp.netbios-ns,tcp.dest=tcp.netbios-ns
> ignore tcp tcp.source=tcp.netbios-dgm,tcp.dest=tcp.netbios-dgm
> ignore tcp tcp.source=tcp.netbios-ssn,tcp.dest=tcp.netbios-ssn
>
> # Do the same for netbios-ns broadcasts
> # NOTE: your /etc/services file may not define the netbios services
> # in which case you should comment out the next lines.
> #accept udp 30 udp.dest=udp.netbios-ns
> #accept udp 30 udp.source=udp.netbios-ns
> ignore udp udp.source=udp.netbios-ns,udp.dest=udp.netbios-ns
> ignore udp udp.source=udp.netbios-dgm,udp.dest=udp.netbios-dgm
> ignore udp udp.source=udp.netbios-ssn,udp.dest=udp.netbios-ssn
>
> Ronald Hovens wrote:
>
> > ISP's DNS servers, (the ones that are stored within the win98 DNS
> > settings an in /etc/resolv.conf). I'ts ok that diald brings up the
> > connection for a DNS query, since the ISP's DNS servers are outside my
> > ethernet, BUT WHY IS THE DNS LOOKUP PERFORMED, EVEN WHEN I LOOK AROUND
> > WITHIN MY ETHERNET (sit 1...3)? Does running a DNS server on my own
> > linux box resolve this problem?
> >
> > Many thanks in advance.
> >
> > Ronald Hovens
>
> --
>
> Come Visit Our Website
>
> http://www.freeyellow.com/members/creative-services
>
> Please Visit Our Sponsers (We get paid per visit)
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 03 Apr 1999 16:01:53 -0600
From: Bob Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: can't locate module net-pf-4
The answer and how to turn them off can be found in the mini howto
kerneld.
"news.interweb.be" wrote:
>
> Hi there,
>
> Could someone tell me why I get the following error messqge each time I boot
> or restart the network:
>
> modprobe: can't locate module net-pf-4
> modprobe: can't locate module net-pf-5
>
> I had a look to my module config (even tried to remove everything and
> re-install kernel again), but found nothing...
>
> Any clue ?
>
> - Bertrand
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 18:27:39 -0500
From: Michael John Erskine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Hacker Attack and identd
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> What do you using windows 95, how come you not cover your self
> do not open telnet use tcp_sucker, and firewall
>
> and do not install anything on your firewall machine except firewall
> block,cut,rap, all the ports, I got a Realtech Nics Remove the No.14
> line from botom of the coper board, then no_way promicis mode.
>
> I had a same thing when I was 16, now fucking no_fuck_in_way.
> if some on can hack Fbi then they can Hack me !
>
> Hony be care_full , animals out there.
> jscott..
>
> On Thu, 25 Feb 1999 11:48:29 -0500, Cory Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >I recently had a hacker attack.
As do we all...
> One of the things I noticed was that
> >durring my attack, I had MANY identd logs in my messages log.
Identd is a daemon process which helps to identify the machine that is
connecting to you (you to a machine that you connect to).
> What are
> >they? How was identd used to attack my machine,
It probably wasn't used to attack you. The attack was probably thru
sendmail, ftp, rcp, or some other route. If you will send your logs to my
E-Mail address I would be delighted to look at them and give you such feedback
as I am able. Send 'messages', 'debug', and 'syslog'. I have been
interested in these sort of things for years.
> and then the many
> >networks that were attacked from my machine?
Probably the source of the Identd messages.
> (Many unhappy net-admins
> >mailed me about this).
Tell them to kiss your butt. If they had their stuff right, they would not
have been hacked either.
> I saw between 50 and 100 identd logs from
> >different hosts, many of them being in Italy. Unfortunately, my system
> >was mostly destroyed in the process, but I still have the log files to
> >look at.
Give me the logs, I will give you a host and IP address that he came through
if it is in the logs.
> >
> >Any help?
> >
YOU BET.
Michael
--
Michael Erskine, Simply Computers!, Urbanna, Virginia, 804-758-3793
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-----------== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
http://www.newsfeeds.com/ The Largest Usenet Servers in the World!
=========== Over 72,000 Groups, Plus Dedicated Binaries Servers ==========
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 18:38:38 -0500
From: Michael John Erskine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: newbie and Pingaling Prob??
Brian McCauley wrote:
> "Tony s" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > This is the next strange thing???
> >
> > I can only ping my linux box successfully if I ping my w95 machine at the
> > same time, otherwise 'request time out' on the w95 machine, AND when I turn
> > off the ping on the linux box the w95 is again unable to ping.
> >
> > Ifconfig report all ok and all up, but it seems to me that the Ethernet
> > card will only respond when it is doing something at hte same time or is
> > open from another program in linux.
Sounds like you have something wrong on the W95 box. Try 'winipconfig' or
'winifconfig' I forget which. Check to make sure the W95 box is pointed at the
name server.
> >
> > Any help to this mysterious situation.
>
> This sounds like and IRQ problem to me.
Bullshit.
> By forcing the OS to look at
> the NIC it spots that there are incomming packets waiting to be
> processed.
>
> Check for IRQ discredencies or clashes.
Double bull shit.If the damn thing is working at all there is no IRQ conflict.
>
>
> Note: I'm guessing here. I've not seen this with NICs before but I
> have seen something very similar with serial cards - card did not work
> unless I had a tight loop echoing null strings to it.
>
> --
> \\ ( ) No male bovine | Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> . _\\__[oo faeces from | Phones: +44 121 471 3789 (home)
> .__/ \\ /\@ /~) /~[ /\/[ | +44 121 627 2173 (voice) 2175 (fax)
> . l___\\ /~~) /~~[ / [ | PGP-fp: D7 03 2A 4B D8 3A 05 37...
> # ll l\\ ~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ | http://www.wcl.bham.ac.uk/~bam/
> ###LL LL\\ (Brian McCauley) |
--
Michael Erskine, Simply Computers!, Urbanna, Virginia, 804-758-3793
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-----------== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
http://www.newsfeeds.com/ The Largest Usenet Servers in the World!
=========== Over 72,000 Groups, Plus Dedicated Binaries Servers ==========
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 18:41:49 -0500
From: Michael John Erskine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Network problem!! Please HELP!
William Evans wrote:
> >>>>> "ronnie" == ronnie w <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> ronnie> When I boot the machine the first network card (eth0) is brought up at
>boot
> ronnie> and is working properly, that is that I can ping other hosts in my
>network,
> ronnie> and using Internet etc. The second card (eth1) is brought up and
>configured
> ronnie> manually by using the following commands:
>
> ronnie> ifconfig eth1 up
> ronnie> ipx_interface add -p eth1 802.3 0x20
>
> Am I to understand that you don't have TCP/IP on eth1?
>
> ronnie> After this, all works fine, I can both communicate with the TCP network
>and
> ronnie> IPX network, but after some "random" time it seems like the
> ronnie> the first network (eth1) interface hangs. I cant ping other hosts (the
> ronnie> ping command hang, so I have to press CTRL-C to return to the prompt), no
> ronnie> access to Internet and so on. The IPX interface is still working.
>
> (I assume you mean eth0 as the first, esp since it's the one with IP
> on it.)
>
> Actually, it doesn't sound like a problem with the card at all. It
> sounds like your dns configuration is going belly up. When it "hangs"
> next time, try pinging a known IP address instead of a hostname and
> see if that works.
>
> (What clued me in is your 'route' ... with the '-n', it doesn't do
> hostname lookups on the ip addresses.)
Remove the -n.
>
>
> If you can ping an ip address but not a name, double check that (1)
> your dns configuration is as you expect it to be, and (2a) your DNS
> server is reachable and up, or (2b) if you're running your own name
> server, that it is still running.
>
> HTH
>
> -bill
>
> --
> William Evans < william . evans @ computer . org >
--
Michael Erskine, Simply Computers!, Urbanna, Virginia, 804-758-3793
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-----------== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
http://www.newsfeeds.com/ The Largest Usenet Servers in the World!
=========== Over 72,000 Groups, Plus Dedicated Binaries Servers ==========
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 18:48:44 -0500
From: Michael John Erskine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: no enough ip address !
Erik Hensema wrote:
> Kameneff Ivan ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
> >( network )
> > | | |
> >+-------+ +-------------+
> >| PC | | my PC under |
> >| under | | linux |
> >| win98 | +-------------+
> >+-------+ ip adress : 195.221.233.198
> >no ip adress
> >
> >Because all ip adresses (for an internet acces) have been adribuated
> >(from 195.221.233.0
> >to 195.221.233.255), the PC under win 98 can't have an internet acces.
> >
> >
> >I would like to know if it was possible for th PC under win98 to have
> >acces to
> >internet throw my PC (under linux) ?
Yes. Recompile the kernel. Set up IP Masquerading, and IP Forwarding. Might
as well optomise as a router though that really isn't necessary in this case.
Now give the W95 box a 192.168.xxx.xxx address. Point it to the Linux box as a
gateway and nameserver. You are running named? That should take care of it.
Oh! yeah, you now have about 65534 new addresses in your address space... :)
> Even if the Pc under win98 will be
> >disconnect to
> >intranet.
> >
> >One more problem is that i have only one network card.
>
> I'm not sure if this works, so don't try it before anybody in this groups
> confirms it works.
> Give the Linux PC an IP alias, being 192.168.1.1, and assign 192.168.1.2 to
> the win98 PC. The win98 PC can now communicate with your Linux PC using the
> 192.168.* range. This range is a private IP range, so it can safely be used.
> The part above is what i'm not sure about. If this works, the rest will work
> too.
>
> Now, you can use standard IP-Masquerading. The win98 PC connects to the
> Linux box, and the Linux box forwards the IP packets with it's own source IP
> address.
>
> My only concern is the use of two destinct IP networks on one physical
> network. However, I don't think it will be a problem.
>
> Read the following mini-howto's: IP-Alias and IP-Masquerade
>
> --
> Erik Hensema ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
--
Michael Erskine, Simply Computers!, Urbanna, Virginia, 804-758-3793
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-----------== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
http://www.newsfeeds.com/ The Largest Usenet Servers in the World!
=========== Over 72,000 Groups, Plus Dedicated Binaries Servers ==========
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 18:50:30 -0500
From: Michael John Erskine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: IP forwarding situation
Curt wrote:
> If you turn on forwarding without IP masqurading it won't be a firewall
> anymore, it will be a router.
> I assume since they are trusted domain this is ok.
>
> Look at /etc/sysconfig/network. Look for :
>
> FORWARD_IPV4=yes
>
> If it's not there then add it. You may also need to add the routes to your
> route table.
>
> If it is a Linux firewall, fowarding may already be on. You may need to
> turn off IP masquarading.
But why would you want to do that? Had a linux box, P120 w/64M. Just an old
clunker but darn she could switch for 100 other PC's and my address space was
huge. If you are going to forward packets you might as well masquerade too.
>
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
> <7e0pa7$tv8$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> >Hi! Here's my network config...
> >
> >
> > Company workstations
> > |
> > | +--------+ ( )
> > +~~~~~~~~~~~~+ eth1| LINUX | +~~~~~~~~~~~~+ ( )
> > |NT 4 Domain1|<--------->|REDHAT |<------->|NT 4 Domain2|---->(Internet)
> > +~~~~~~~~~~~~+ |FIREWALL|eth0 +~~~~~~~~~~~~+ ( )
> > +--------+ ( )
> >
> >2 NT domains with a Linux RedHat firewall in between.
> >I'm an NT Admin who walked into this situation with no knowledge of Linux.
> >What I need: Employees from Domain1 need to be able to access files and
> shares
> >in Domain2. These two domains can be set up as trusts. Also, users dialing
> in
> >to a server equipped with RAS in Domain2 need to be validated to access
> files
> >and shares in Domain1.
> >
> >I know it's probably a simple operation, but I'm a Linux newbie, and any
> help
> >would be greatly appreciated. I've been told that what I need to do here is
> IP
> >forwarding. Is that true, and if so, how?
> >
> >Thanks in advance...
> >
> >-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
> >http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
--
Michael Erskine, Simply Computers!, Urbanna, Virginia, 804-758-3793
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-----------== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
http://www.newsfeeds.com/ The Largest Usenet Servers in the World!
=========== Over 72,000 Groups, Plus Dedicated Binaries Servers ==========
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 19:00:12 -0500
From: Michael John Erskine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: HELP!! Final attempt at Samba installation
John Myers wrote:
> M. Buchenrieder wrote:
> >
> > John Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > >Current "configuration" (using the word loosely!):
> > >
> > >Linux system;
> > >486/66, 16Mb, 4.3Gb, SVGA (Trident9000),3C503
> >
> > Did yu setup your networking properly ? Is your 3C503 card
> > detected at startup ? What does "ifconfig" tell you ?
>
> Yes, I believe so (setup), but that's actually the theme of my question
> (s). Yes, linux detects card at startup.
>
> ifconfig -a returns the following:
>
> lo Link encap: Local Loopback
> inet addr: 127.0.0.1 Bcast 127.255.255.255 Netmask 255.0.0.0
> BROADCAST LOOPBACK MTU:3584 Metric:1
> RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frames:0
> TX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frames:0
> Collisions:0
>
> eth0 Link encap: Ethernet HWaddr: 02:60:8C:A1:5A:AA
> inet addr: 0.0.0.0 Bcast 0.0.0.0 Netmask 0.0.0.0
> BROADCAST MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
> RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frames:0
> TX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frames:0
> Collisions:0
> Base Address: 0x300 Memory: dc000-de000
>
> After issuing command: ifconfig eth0 192.168.0.1 netmask 255.255.255.0 up
>
> The second ifconfig -a returns:
>
> lo Link encap: Local Loopback
> inet addr: 127.0.0.1 Bcast 127.255.255.255 Netmask 255.0.0.0
> BROADCAST LOOPBACK MTU:3584 Metric:1
> RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frames:0
> TX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frames:0
> Collisions:0
>
> eth0 Link encap: Ethernet HWaddr: 02:60:8C:A1:5A:AA
> inet addr: 192.168.0.1 Bcast 192.1683.0.255
This is bad... 192.1683.0.255 is a bad address.
> Netmask 255.255.255.0
> UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
> RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frames:0
> TX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frames:0
> Collisions:0
> Interrupt:5 Base Address: 0x300 Memory: dc000-de000
>
> >
>
> > >Debian linux- (works...doesn't do much without apps of course)
> >
> > If you have Debian, you do have the apps right there at your hands.
>
> While installing "packages" I selected several that sounded like working
> applications, but have no idea where they are stored, or how to invoke any
> of them.
>
> > >X-Windows- (works...not sure what, if any, useful apps available)
>
> X-Windows gives me a pitiful little clock, and 3 "windows", each of which
> seems to be just a "brighter" version of the command line console. If
> this is what it is supposed to do, I would just as soon uninstall it and
> free up the wasted space.
If this is all the harder you are going to try, then uninstall it.
>
>
> >
> > See above. It's just a matter of what you installed.
> >
> > >Samba (doesn't seem to do anything...)
> >
> > Samba per se doesn't do anything unless you setup your networking
> > correctly.
> >
> > >
> > >smb.conf- Have edited, written, re-written, copied (examples from every
> > >imagineable source), modified, and re-modified file countless times.
> > >No error messages, but no apparent ability to connect to Win 95 system.
> >
That is because W95 won't let you connect if you don't set it up to do that.
It works the other way round. Linux is the server, W95 is the client. Try
telneting to the Linux box from the W95 box.
> > [...]
> >
> > You wouldn't perhaps want to tell us
> >
> > - what your networking setup does look like,
>
> I assume you are asking about hardware.
> Stripped down to the simplest possible configuration, just to get a
> connection established:
> (1) Win 95 "workstation" with 16bit Ethernet card, 10 base T cat 5
> cabling, 8 port hub, (1) seemingly impotent "linux box",with 3c503 card
>
> Regarding software configuration of Samba, have used so many different
> smb.conf files I wouldn't know where to begin. Have currently reverted to
> example smb.conf from "Tridge" site that reportedly is used with
> Win95 "workstations" I added users to mimick the setup described in the
> smb.conf file...users does not seem to be a problem though...can't even
> get that far. I can't even see the linux box from the Win95 system
See above comment on the IP address...
>
>
> - what "ifconfig" and "route -n" are telling you,
> > - what "dmesg" has to say about your NIC ?
>
> route -n seems to give column headers without any info:
> Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use IFace
>
> dmesg returns normal info about drive(s), ports, etc. Network specific
> info follows:
>
> 3c503.c: Presently autoprobing (not recommended0 for a single card
> 3c503.c: v1.10 9/23/93 Donald Becker...
> eth0: 3c503 at i/o base 0x300, node 02 60 8c a1 5a aa, using internal xcvr
> eth0: 3c503 8Kb RAM, 8 Kb shared mem window at 0xdc000-oxddfff
>
> >
> > Unless you can provide useful information, I'm tempted to assume that
> > you're just trolling.
>
Or perhaps just not knowledgable in Unix. Which is OK write me. I will try
to help. Keep it off the news group.
> Took me an hour to find out what "trolling" meant. The answer is, no.
> Hope the information provided is "useful"
>
> Thanks very much for the response,
>
> John Myers
>
> > Michael
> > --
> > Michael Buchenrieder * [EMAIL PROTECTED] *
> http://www.muc.de/~mibu
> > Lumber Cartel Unit #456 (TINLC) & Official Netscum
> > Note: If you want me to send you email, don't munge your address.
>
> ------------------ Posted via SearchLinux ------------------
> http://www.searchlinux.com
--
Michael Erskine, Simply Computers!, Urbanna, Virginia, 804-758-3793
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-----------== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
http://www.newsfeeds.com/ The Largest Usenet Servers in the World!
=========== Over 72,000 Groups, Plus Dedicated Binaries Servers ==========
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 18:52:10 -0500
From: Michael John Erskine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Help! DNS Error using RedHat 5.2 and named!
Bullwinkle wrote:
> I just set up a DNS server using named on RedHat 5.2. Everything
> seems to work fine, it resolves names fine. However, when I do an
> nslookup I get an error:
>
> *** Can't find server name for address 10.10.0.25: Non-existant domain
> *** Default servers are not available
>
> 10.10.0.25 is my name server I just set up.
Try putting 127.0.0.1 in the /etc/resolv.conf file.
>
>
> I've gone through the How-To's and my books, but can't seem to figure
> out where I went wrong!
>
> Any help would be appreciated!
--
Michael Erskine, Simply Computers!, Urbanna, Virginia, 804-758-3793
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-----------== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
http://www.newsfeeds.com/ The Largest Usenet Servers in the World!
=========== Over 72,000 Groups, Plus Dedicated Binaries Servers ==========
------------------------------
From: Rien Broekstra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: IP Forwarding Configuration
Date: Sun, 04 Apr 1999 01:45:41 +0200
David Peppard wrote:
>
> I am a new user to Linux and am configuring an existing Linux box. I am
> needing to find where the configuration for IP forwarding is. The box is
> currently routing all incoming e-mail to one server and I need to add/edit
> this setting. Where can I find this configuration? Thanks to whoever can
> help. :-)
>
> -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
> http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
I don't know exactly how mail routing is configured, but it is not the
same as IP forwarding, check out the sendmail documentation or the Linux
network administrators guide. (LNAG)
grtx Rien Broekstra
--
Rien Broekstra L III N N U U X X
Tel: +31(0)735517594 L I N N N U U XX
Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] L I N N N U U XX
LLLLL III N N UUUU X X
------------------------------
From: "Massimiliano Ciancio" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Where can I find TCPDUMP for linux?
Date: Sun, 4 Apr 1999 00:18:58 +0200
Jean Le Brun ha scritto nel messaggio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>Where can I find TCPDUMP source and/or binary for Linux?
>
>
Try on http://rufus.w3.org/linux/RPM/.
Massimiliano Ciancio
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
