Linux-Networking Digest #632, Volume #10 Thu, 25 Mar 99 19:13:45 EST
Contents:
Stray netbios packet leaving through Masquerade? (Clinton Pierce)
Re: Stray netbios packet leaving through Masquerade? (Clinton Pierce)
Cannot FTP out thru a IPMASQ setup ("HLEE PRSN")
Re: how to get getty to generate login (Bill Unruh)
Re: FireWall/Masquerading Problem ("Curt")
FUD ALERT! was Re: Frontpage and ASP under linux? ("The Lone Scribe")
Re: Frontpage and ASP under linux? (Bill Anderson)
Re: What is the best Linux to install? ("Jay D Ribak")
kernel: ip_masq_new(proto=TCP): no free ports. (Brian Turner)
Re: For all you Nicrosoft lovers (Bill Anderson)
getting info on socket state (gregoire barbier)
Re: 2 Token Ring-Cards (Greg Weeks)
Re: IP forwarding w/ 2 network cards ("Curt")
MS-VPN: Can it be used behind NAT? (John Norman)
Re: No network - RH 5.2 (" -=[ Brko ]=-")
NFS Permission problems (Toby Boreham)
Re: LPD print jobs from AIX -> LINUX failing (Torfinn Ingolfsen)
Re: modem sharing? ("TURBO1010")
gfc2206 Netsurf ethernet card problems ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Clinton Pierce)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.networking.misc
Subject: Stray netbios packet leaving through Masquerade?
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 20:41:40 GMT
Here's the network: RedHat Linuxsystem, 2.2 kernel acting as IP
forward/masquerade host, linux and Windows boxes behind it on private LAN.
One of the Windows 95 boxes is, occasionally, sending a UDP packet on port
138 (netbios-dgm) to a box on the outside Internet. (Destination:
dresden.workgroup.com). What is this packet? Should I be blocking that
port? The masquerade is set up to let any packets out that want to go,
but not to allow incoming connections. (Unless of course, a full-blown
TCP stream is setup...)
Should I be concerned? What's this packet?
Help.
--
Clinton A. Pierce "If you rush a Miracle Man, you get rotten
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Miracles." -- Miracle Max, The Princess Bride
http://www.geeksalad.org
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Clinton Pierce)
Subject: Re: Stray netbios packet leaving through Masquerade?
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 21:03:50 GMT
Yup, bad form to followup on your own posting....but I dumped a packet (or
two) with sniffit, that might help. The sending system is "peanut"
(192.168.1.10), the receiving system is...?
UDP Packet ID (from_IP.port-to_IP.port):
192.168.1.10.138-192.168.1.255.138
E . . . ( . . . @ . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . q . . . . q . . . . . .
. . . . F A E F E B E O F F F E C A
C A C A C A C A C A C A C A C A A A .
A B A C F P F P E N F D E C F C E P
F H F D E F F P F P A C A B . . S M B
% . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . ' . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . ' . V . . .
. . . . . . 8 . \ M A I L S L O T \ B
R O W S E . . . @ w . . W O R K G R O
U P . . . . . . . . . . @ . . . . .
P E A N U T .
UDP Packet ID (from_IP.port-to_IP.port):
192.168.1.10.138-208.249.6.227.138
E . . . . . . . @ . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . J . . . s . . . . . .
. . . . F A E F E B E O F F F E C A
C A C A C A C A C A C A C A C A A A .
F H E P F C E L E H F C E P F F F A
C A C A C A C A C A C A B L . . S M B
% . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . V . . . X . . .
. . . . . . . . \ M A I L S L O T \ B
R O W S E . . . . . . . . . .
--
Clinton A. Pierce "If you rush a Miracle Man, you get rotten
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Miracles." -- Miracle Max, The Princess Bride
http://www.geeksalad.org
------------------------------
From: "HLEE PRSN" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Cannot FTP out thru a IPMASQ setup
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 13:45:40 -0800
I'm a LINUX newbie and I've been having a problem where all the computers
here seem to not be able to issue FTP commands. We are able to enter into
an FTP site fine (username and password authentification goes through
successfully) however, issuing a command such as "ls" returns an error
message stating "Port argument must be 1025 or greater/Can't build data
connection: Connection refused". Does this error have to do with a setting
in my inetd.conf file (it's throwing wild shots since I'm not sure at all)?
If this is inherent with my IPMASQ implementation, where can I get into to
turn it off or modify it? I imagine standard FTP commands carry out through
ports lower than 1025.... so is there any workaroudn to this?
Thanks ahead of time. You may email me at [EMAIL PROTECTED](x) (take out the
"(x)" when replying). Deeply appreciate it!
-Howard-
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bill Unruh)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: how to get getty to generate login
Date: 25 Mar 1999 21:48:47 GMT
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (M. Buchenrieder) writes:
>>it primarily talks about getty and mentions using uugetty for serial
>>input and output. Where can I find documentation about mgetty?
http://www.leo.org/~doering/mgetty/
------------------------------
From: "Curt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: FireWall/Masquerading Problem
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 17:13:22 -0500
I have not use kernel 2.2.x yet. But from my understanding, 2.2 uses
ipchains
rather than ip masquerade. ip masq is a subset of ipchains.
ipfwadm is for ip masq with kernel 2.0.x
ipchains have similar rules for 2.2.x
http://metalab.unc.edu/LDP/HOWTO/IPCHAINS-HOWTO.html
Stephen Thomas wrote in message ...
>I am running S.u.S.E. Linux 6.0 and kernel 2.2.2 at home and am fairly new
>to Linux. I am trying to setup the linux machine to masquerade for my other
>2 computers into my dial-up ISP account using a dynamic IP address on the
>outside and 192.168.10.x on the inside. The dialup is working and
>IP-Forwarding seems to be working but I get errors when the system boots up
>and tries to start the firewall and Masquerading. The error is:
>
>ipfwadm: setsockopt failed: Protocol not available
>ipfwadm: setsockopt failed: Protocol not available
> -> spoofing ipfwadm: setsockopt failed: Protocol not available
>tcp ipfwadm: setsockopt failed: Protocol not available
>udp ipfwadm: setsockopt failed: Protocol not available
>
>ipfwadm: setsockopt failed: Protocol not available
>
>Any help would be appreciated.
>
>
------------------------------
From: "The Lone Scribe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: FUD ALERT! was Re: Frontpage and ASP under linux?
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 1999 11:36:06 -0800
Lee Sharp wrote in message ...
> In The Real World (tm) Micro$oft customers pay people to run Micro$oft
>products on That Internet Thing (tm) and you will proudly walk past it.
Yadda yadda yadda. FUD, FUD, FUD. If it's a pissing contest you want, I'll
bet I make more money doing UNIX programming than you do with your pissy
little ASP. But that's not the real point here, is it? Look, I'm not denying
your right to play with those inferior M$ tools in your concept of 'the real
world'. It's a free country, and if you want to saddle yourself with an
inferior, closed technology and ride that high horse off into the Micro$haft
sunset, that's your right. What I question is your deep-seated need to
preach the Gospel of DeGates here in a Linux newsgroup. Why not go preach to
the choir over in the M$ newsgroups, or are you just itching for a fight?
Or do you really, deep down inside, realize that Linux is superior after
all?
------------------------------
From: Bill Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Frontpage and ASP under linux?
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 21:17:55 +0000
Dan Nguyen wrote:
>
> In alt.os.linux Aaron Saikovski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> : Is it at all possible to have frontpage extensions
> IMHO Frontpage extensions are stupid.
>
> : ASP engine running under linux to as to allow my existing sites to be ported
> : from NT to linux?
> If your using apache, checkout http://modules.apache.org. There
> appear to be to modules to apache which allow apache to handle ASP pages.
>
> : Also what is a decent database to use for dynamic web content?
> Now your being funny. If you plan on connecting through a ODBC
> intereface, your probably out of luck. Most unix webapps which hit
> database backends use mysql. Though msql and postgresql are also
> available.
php supports odbc.
there are odbc modules for perl and python.
mysql supports odbc.
Zope has an odbc product.
what's so funny?
> : I have heard of php..can anyone give me more info on this...Thanks
> PHP3 is interesting. It provide most of the functionality of ASP, but
> uses its own language (which I personally don't like). It has a
> decent interface to mysql and msql, and can connect to and ODBC
> interface if you can find one for linux.
Here are a few:
mysql
informix
oracle
sybase (IIRC)
postgres (IIRC)
gadfly
__
Bill Anderson Linux Administrator
MCS-Boise (ARC) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Jay D Ribak" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.redhat,alt.os.linux.slackware
Subject: Re: What is the best Linux to install?
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 1999 15:14:08 -0500
George Csahanin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:2WwI2.8
>people. Do it their way. The system setup stuff in /etc/rc.d is a laugh.
Try
>to customize anything, it's tough, get ready to spend time with grep
looking
>for where stuff is.
I have always used Slackware, and always will. I will be there at the front
lines
bashing Red Hat with the best of them, but in this case, I really can't.
Red Hat
is using a standard System5 init style. Nothing unusual about it and you
certainly can't blame the folks at Red Hat for it. Patrick made the
conscious
decision to go with a BSDish init style, and while it is cleaner and easier
to
use, there is really nothing wrong with Red Hat's.
------------------------------
From: Brian Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: kernel: ip_masq_new(proto=TCP): no free ports.
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 22:45:10 GMT
I am getting the above message on SuSE 5.3 after installing
their 2.0.36 kernel. Once I get this message masquerading
stops working (reliably).
netstat -an and viewing the syslog (I have verbose logging turned
on) both reveal few connections (i.e. < 4)
Any suggestions?
Thanks,
Brian
------------------------------
From: Bill Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: For all you Nicrosoft lovers
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 22:17:49 +0000
doole wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Don Baccus) apparently said this:
> >
> >Those who wrote our Constitution understood the world
> >better than you do, I'm afraid...
> >--
>
> Well, as an indicator of just how well YOU understand the world - it's
> not "our" constitution, it's yours. I don't live in the glorious,
> presumptuous U.S. of A...
Actually, it would be an understanding of grammar, not the workd.
In any event, the poster made a reference to the US,and proceded to make
statements about it as a resident of it.
The above snippet you quoted is perfectly acceptable regardless of your
(or my) residency.
When he started with "our own little country" is quite ambiguous though
... appears to make an assumption of the residency of the readers.
__
Bill Anderson Linux Administrator
MCS-Boise (ARC) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
My opinions are just that, *my* opinions.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (gregoire barbier)
Crossposted-To:
comp.unix.developper,comp.os.linux.development,comp.os.linux.development.system
Subject: getting info on socket state
Date: 25 Mar 1999 23:11:33 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Under Linux (kernel 2.0.34)
I would like to get socket state, I mean "CLOSE_WAIT", "ESTABLISHED"... as
netstat shows.
I need that within a process which has a file descriptor open on the socket.
I would like to find a better way that to parse /proc/net/tcp like netstat does.
Can anybody help me ?
--
/ |\ Gregoire BARBIER - eleve ingenieur informaticien (Epita)
/ |_|
/ || \ E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
/___||___\ Page Web: http://www.epita.fr/~barbie_g
------------------------------
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Greg Weeks)
Subject: Re: 2 Token Ring-Cards
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1999 20:07:06 -0600
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Efrem Locarno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi,
>
> I have a linux RH5.2 with 2 token ring (Token ring auto 16/4) (Linux
> version 2.0.36 ).
>
> Both are IBM Auto 16/4, configured:
> TR0: IRQ: 9, I/O: A20
> TR1: IRQ: 3, I/O: A24
>
>
> The two card seems to run properly alone but I am not able to create a
> gateway (with two token ring adapter running at the same time).
>
> Does linux supports two token ring 16/4 token ring adapter (gateway
> configuration) ? if yes, how can I configure linux to do it ?
The last time I check the source for the token ring driver, oh at
least 6 monthes ago, there were warnings in it that two cards would
not work. This could have changed by now. You also will not be able to
use bridging, only an IP router, The bridging code only works with
ethernet.
Greg Weeks
--
http://durendal.tzo.com/greg/
------------------------------
From: "Curt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: IP forwarding w/ 2 network cards
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 17:30:08 -0500
Well if your internal IPs are not valid internet IP (like 192.168.x.x),
then packets will probably
get dropped by the first router it comes to. You'll need to use ip
masquarading for it to work.
If you are using valid IPs, then post the results of the command 'route'.
You may need to
add a route for your internal netowrk.
Hope this helps.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message <7ddkvm$iap$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>The following question involves RedHat 5.2 w/ kernel 2.0.36.
>I have set up a linux box between my internal network and my gateway to the
>internet. IP forwarding is on. Traffic is forwarded out on eth0, but is
not
>forwarded back in on eth1. This has been tested with no firewall rules to
>inhibit. How do I check the system to make SURE BOTH network cards are
>forwarding and ensure that they do. Thanks.
>
>-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
>http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
From: John Norman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: MS-VPN: Can it be used behind NAT?
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 18:14:57 GMT
Hi all,
We're currently running Redhat 5.2, compiled with IP forwarding and
masquerading. We have a single static IP, and use the Linux box for the
proxy/gateway.
Is it possible for people on the network to place outgoing connections
using Microsoft VPN? It works fine when they use their dial-in ISP, and
it connects successfully from behind the proxy, but it fails to respond to
a network request. I presume that MS-VPN is a NAT-unfriendly protocal?
Is there a module or other work-around ala FTP? Thanks,
John
------------------------------
From: " -=[ Brko ]=-" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: No network - RH 5.2
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 08:58:14 +0100
i don't have experience with 3com 3c509b but i have 3c905bTX card
and i have this problem when i start my computer. After one or
two hard-resets everything work fine...the problem is in hardware because
i have dual boot redhat5.2 with win98 and this problem is the same in win98,
and in linux too
when i start my computer, win98 is screaming that network adapter is not
woking properly, when i restart, everything is ok...when i first boot into
linux,
it's detecting invalid settings for this NIC, when restart everything is
ok..
this problem is propably problem of motherboard too because on some
MB's it's working properly...
i heard that this NIC is loosing it's settings etc and only resolution is
restart...
i don't know if my problem is your problem too, i think this is problem
only with 3c905b cards...
hope it helps
[brko]
St�le Raunholm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I have a computer in my workplace installed with RedHat 5.2 and Win 98.
> When I run Linux I can't get access to the network. I've transferred all
> the info I've found in Win98 about DNS server, gateway, my own
> IP-adress. I entered all this info during installation, and I've checked
> it in Linuxconfig, but I still get no reaction from the network. My NIC
> is 3Com 3c509b.
>
> Hints please ?
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Toby Boreham)
Subject: NFS Permission problems
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 18:35:42 GMT
I've been having a strange problem with NFS.
My setup is this:
/etc/exports file on server:
/data/data0 andromeda(rw,secure,all_squash)
/etc/fstab entry on workstation:
orion:/data/data0 /mnt/data0 nfs rsize=8192,wsize=8192
If I am root on the Workstation and a make a new directory on the
server,
and then a sub directory it works fine.
If I am not root, I can create a new directory on the server but
before I
can create a directory on that I have to chmod a+w to the original
directory. Does anyone have a suggestion on how I can get around this?
TIA
Toby
------------------------------
From: Torfinn Ingolfsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.aix
Subject: Re: LPD print jobs from AIX -> LINUX failing
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1999 00:49:57 +0100
Zing Zing Awungshi Shishak wrote:
> I have a problem LPD printing from AIX (4.3.2.0) to a remote printer on a
> Linux box(red hat 5.0).
> If I send two print jobs (both postscript btw) from AIX in quick succession
> to the remote queue (setup raw w/ no filter) on the linux box only the
> first job prints and the other disappears.
>
Hmm, if both jobs are postscript, it sounds to me that you're bitten by the
postscript "Ctrl-D" bug.Usually, one sends a Ctrl-D at the end of a ps job, to
reset the printer.
But some printers take too long to reset, they loose the second print job while
they're working.
The fix usually is to rewrite printer setup / definition on the machine you do
prinouts from.
Check if this helps.
--
Torfinn Ingolfsen
Norway
------------------------------
From: "TURBO1010" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: modem sharing?
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 15:33:32 -0800
Yup, use IP Masquerading.
T. Jahn wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>Hello world!
>
>Is there a possibility to share a modem connected to a linux server, so
>that i.e. W9x users can access it via tcp/ip?
>
>Thank you in advance!
>
>
>bye & cus,
> Tobias Jahn
>
>
>_________________________________________
>Linux - Where do you want to go tomorrow?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: gfc2206 Netsurf ethernet card problems
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 17:03:52 GMT
Hi,
I am trying to use a Netsurf GFC2206 fast pci ethernet card with
redhat 5.2 and have had no luck...... I have used ne2000 pci, ne2000
with no luck.,.,. i cannot see anything with ifconfig except
loopback. any ideas and has anyone used this card with success???
billz
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
