Linux-Networking Digest #635, Volume #10 Fri, 26 Mar 99 00:13:38 EST
Contents:
ISDN for Motorola Bitsurfr (Moses Ling)
Re: Need unusual IP address translation (Cyberwing)
Re: Bought modem to work in LINUX! ("Bob D")
Re: Network address translation (Cyberwing)
Re: Masq. + Rules!!!!!???? ("Eugene")
Re: Samba and Win NT....I give up.....ack! (vaclav vyvoda)
Re: Dial up Linux ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux, DHCP, and cable modems... (Doug O'Leary)
What NIC to buy for Linux machine? (Chuck Webb)
Re: AOL and Linux (David Polete)
Re: Can Linux browse NT? ("Flying")
Samba to VMS ("P. Reinhold")
Re: Samba 19.18.p10 &Suse Linux 6.0 & NT4.0 Workstation... (Karl-Heinz Lintz)
Where can I get nmap for Linux? ("Herminio Alvarez, Jr.")
Re: Denver Area LINUX Consultant Wanted ("Timebandit")
Re: What NIC to buy for Linux machine? (John Norman)
Re: Advice on NIC's and hubs (John Norman)
Re: No Internet Access ("Matt Anderson")
Re: Automatically "startx" (Bill Unruh)
Re: Dialing into Linux box (Bill Unruh)
Re: Even innocent people need privacy ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Direct connect two linux computers: something's wrong (miguel cervantes)
Re: Too Frequent Dial ( DNS/Ipfwadm/Diald) (Bill Unruh)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Moses Ling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: ISDN for Motorola Bitsurfr
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 21:02:04 -0600
Did anyone know is Motorola BitSurfr ISA Int. ISDN modem supported under
Linux?? I'm thinking about getting one.
Thanks!!
Moses
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 23:51:27 +0100
From: Cyberwing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Need unusual IP address translation
Chris Ott schrieb:
> Here's an interesting problem.
>
> My company does a lot of remote support. What we're doing now is
> using PC Anywhere or a terminal emulator (depending on the remote
> OS) to connect to a computer at our clients' sites. There are
> several problems with this approach, however. One is that it only
> allows us to connect to the machine with the modem. It would be
> nice if we could connect to any machine on their network. Another
> problem is that only one person from here can get to that machine
> at a time. People are always getting busy signals when they're
> trying to do work for clients. Both of these problems could be
> eliminated if we and our clients were connected via TCP/IP,
> i.e. a Linux box at each end, running PPP.
>
> Here's the problem: All of our clients are using the 192.168.1.x
> network. (And, of course, we are, too). So - what I'd like to be
> able to do is have each of our clients' networks look like a
> different address, as far as our network is concerned. (I'd love
> to be able to tell them to change their addresses, but you know
> how those network administrators can be. :-)
>
> For example, let's say I decide to assign IP 192.168.2.x to a
> client and if I telnet to 192.168.2.57, I'd like that to get
> translated to 192.168.*1*.57 at the remote end. It's easy to set
> up the routing on the communications server to get the IP
> packets to the remote Linux box, but once they get there, the
> IP header will need to be rewritten, or something, so the packets
> get to the correct machine. At the same time, the IP packets
> returned to our network from 192.168.1.57 will need to be
> modified, in transit. Of course, our network will need to appear
> to have a different adress from the client's side, as well.
>
> Now, I'm sure this is possible, since IP Masquerading does
> something similar and it works quite well. However, I looked
> into the "ipfwadm" documentation and it doesn't appear to be
> quite powerful enough to do what I need.
>
> Does anyone know a way to do this? Is there a better way to
> accomplish the same thing?
>
> It would be nice if we could do this over the Internet, too,
> using VPN software, but I'm sure that's a completely different
> ball of wax.
>
> Thanks,
> Chris
> --
> Chris Ott Are you children clinging tenaciously to my buttocks?
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Powdered Toast Man
Hi
Their are a lot of free and commertial software under Linux who solve the problem
.
For example :
* Ip Sec is a free VPN Software
* The Virtual Server Projekt is a free software to made masquerading for the
incomming connections
* Some Ip tunneling Software
and look at www.freshmeat.net
cyberwing
------------------------------
From: "Bob D" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Bought modem to work in LINUX!
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1999 03:02:06 GMT
Yes, I can see the speed at first connect. I would like to monitor the
speed during the ppp session. Is there a way to do this?
Bob D
Robert Lynch wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>
>My version of ppp pumps out messages into /var/log/messages, and one is
>the connect speed:
>-----
>...
>Mar 25 12:35:17 ravel chat[1635]: CONNECT
>Mar 25 12:35:17 ravel chat[1635]: -- got it
>Mar 25 12:35:17 ravel chat[1635]: send (^M)
>Mar 25 12:35:17 ravel chat[1635]: expect (ogin:)
>Mar 25 12:35:17 ravel chat[1635]: 50666/ARQ/V90/LAPM/V42BIS^M
>...
>-----
>HTH. Bob L.
>--
>Robert Lynch-Berkeley CA [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>http://www.best.com/~rmlynch/
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 23:26:31 +0100
From: Cyberwing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Network address translation
Super Net News schrieb:
> Can I do NAT with ipfwadm? Can anyone help?
>
> Martin
Yes you can do it with the -m option for more info type ipfwadm -h
cyberwing
------------------------------
From: "Eugene" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Masq. + Rules!!!!!????
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1999 03:25:24 GMT
uhhm, read IP masq howto at www.linux.org/help
--
"Ein Folk, ein Reich, ein Fuhrer" - Adolf Hitler
"One World, one Web, one Program" - Microsoft's slogan
Ng Wai Wing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:7dcrh2$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I have the following rules for my firewall. But I can't telnet from
> the private network to the internet.!!!!
>
> Please help
>
> # Telnet from 202.64.xx.yy to internet.
> /sbin/ipfwadm -I -a accept -k -P tcp -S any/0 telnet \
> -D 202.64.xx.yy 1024:65535
>
> /sbin/ipfwadm -O -a accept -P tcp -S 202.64.xx.yy 1024:65535 \
> -D any/0 telnet
>
> # Masq.
> /sbin/ipfwadm -F -a accept -m -S 10.0.0.1/24
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (vaclav vyvoda)
Subject: Re: Samba and Win NT....I give up.....ack!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1999 03:12:26 GMT
I used 50 on my notebook and 60 on the Samba "server".
On John McKee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
: What did you use for the "os level" setting?
: On Thu, 25 Mar 1999 05:53:48 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (vaclav vyvoda) wrote:
: >I had a similar problem where the Samba server would not appear in
: >Network Neighborhood. My problem was that I have set the "os level" to 0
: >at some point in the past and forgot about it. You may want to check
: >that particular settings.
: >
: >Good luck,
: >
: >Vas
: >
: >On JamesLay [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
: >: Ok......in a nutshell here is the deal:
: >
: >: I've got a NT PDC and a Libretto 70ct. I can see the \\Libretto\tmp
: >: at home with the Win95 boxes and NT server there, but I just can't see
: >: it here at work. I've added the domain name to the Libretto smb.conf
: >: and I can ping everything on the network and the net in general. I've
: >: added an account to the WinNT server here with the name of libretto.
: >: And, I've even added the network to the hosts file. I also set the
: >: securtiy option in smb.conf to server and to share. I still cannot
: >: see it in Network Neighborhood...any help?
: >
: >: JamesLay
: John McKee
: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Dial up Linux
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1999 02:42:18 GMT
In a perfect world, what would be the best solution? Can I install a
incoming ISDN line and go out to an I - Modem which is connected to ttyC0
which is run by mgetty? If so, what kind of TA would I use that could talk
to an I- modem??
Thanks for your response..
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mike Jagdis) wrote:
> In article <7d6t8h$pjb$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> >WHY, oh WHY can I not connect at a faster speed than 24K?? I use USR V.90
> >(NOT Winmodem) on BOTH ends but the speed is still 24K.
>
> You will not get V.90 speeds unless the server end has a digital
> line from the exchange (such as ISDN) with local modem emulation
> hardware on your digital switch which can handle incoming V.90.
>
> If both ends are analogue you can't get better than V.34. If your
> phone line is less than perfect you might not even get that (and nor
> would you get V.90 on it in that case).
>
> >I just need to be able to connect @ 40+K. I am using this box for POP3 and
> >Internet access just like any ISP would do. I work for a non-profit that
> >needs to give internet access to internal staff.
>
> The USR/3-Com Courier I-Modem *might* be able to do head-end V.90
> on an ISDN2 line. If so (check first!) you *could* put in ISDN2
> with an I-Modem at the server end - but if your phone line is
> less than perfect you still might not get V.90 speeds (and remember
> that V.90 is asymmetric too). It's probably worth considering
> ISDN at both ends with a couple of cheapo passive ISDN cards.
>
> Mike
>
> --
> A train stops at a train station, a bus stops at a bus station.
> On my desk I have a work station...
> .----------------------------------------------------------------------.
> | Mike Jagdis | Internet: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] |
> | Roan Technology Ltd. | |
> | 54A Peach Street, Wokingham | Telephone: +44 118 989 0403 |
> | RG40 1XG, ENGLAND | Fax: +44 118 989 1195 |
> `----------------------------------------------------------------------'
>
============= Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ============
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Doug O'Leary)
Subject: Re: Linux, DHCP, and cable modems...
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 21:40:36 -0600
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> Help
>
As a followup, I did run through the DHCP mini-how-to and I fixed one
thing; but I'm still having problems - basically the same symptoms. I
probably would have had problems with the start up scripts if not for the
mini how-to, but that's something for the future.
I also took a look at the version that's installed and it's at 0.65 with
the current one being 0.70. I downloaded the 0.70 version and found that
I couldn't compile it; kept getting errors reporting that IFF_* was an
undeclared function. I took a look at the source and it looked like the
/usr/include/net/if.h headers were in everything they needed to be in, so
I'm at a bit of a loss.
Is anyone aware of an rpm package of the 0.70 version of dhcp?
Any help will be greatly appreciated.
Doug
--
==============
Douglas K. O'Leary
Senior System Admin
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
==============
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chuck Webb)
Subject: What NIC to buy for Linux machine?
Date: 26 Mar 1999 03:59:54 GMT
I'm putting togethter a Linux machine for learning purposes and so
forth...what NIC card would be the best to get with the least amount
of headaches? Appreciate the help.
------------------------------
From: David Polete <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: AOL and Linux
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 21:53:58 -0600
The Lone Scribe wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message <7db97p$gl5$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> >My girlfriend currently uses Internet Explorer to check her AOL mail via
> >AOLnet. I've read from the documentation, that this can also be done on
> >Netscape running on Win 95. Does anyone know if this is possible using
> >Linux's Netscape? Is there a different way of checking her AOL mail while
> >using Linux?
>
> I'm not too familiar with AOLnet, but if that pop3 server can be hit
> successfully with Windows Netscape, it can be done with Linux Netscape too
> in the same manner.
since when do they offer POP3?
if they do, then any pop capable client will work.
if you're running linux then 'fetchmail' will come
in handy if you want to grab the mail and spool it
locally.
good luck,
dp
------------------------------
From: "Flying" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Can Linux browse NT?
Date: 26 Mar 1999 04:00:12 GMT
Hi Lee,
Thanks so much for your very informative answers!
Aloha,
Mike
Lee Sharp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in article
<RKvK2.1694$R22.86838@insync>...
> Mike wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>
> | I am fairly new to Linux.
>
> Welcome!
<<< snipped a good letter to save space>>>>>
------------------------------
From: "P. Reinhold" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Samba to VMS
Date: 22 Mar 1999 15:45:11 GMT
Hi !
I�m trying to connect my SAMBA 1.9.18 to an old VMS Pathworks maschine which
expects the username as part of the share i.e //maschine/share%user .
smbclient works great with this syntax, but smbmount don�t.
Any ideas ?
Peter
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Karl-Heinz Lintz)
Crossposted-To:
de.comp.os.unix.linux.misc,fido.ger.linux,ger.pc.linux,maus.computer.linux
Subject: Re: Samba 19.18.p10 &Suse Linux 6.0 & NT4.0 Workstation...
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1999 05:05:26 +0100
Hallo Users!
Vielen Dank fuer eure freundliche Unterstuetzung!
Eure Tips waren sehr hilfreich in Bezug auf das Freigabe-Problem mit Samba +
Linux OS.
MFG
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thomas Bader schrieb in Nachricht <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>Karl-Heinz Lintz wrote:
>> [...]
>> Are there some other access-rights from Samba or Linux OS avaiable or
>> nessessary?
>
>Yes. Owner, group and other of the directory musst be "rwx" -->
>1. "chmod u+rwx your_directory"
>2. "chmod g+rwx your_directory"
>3. "chmod o+rwx your_directory"
>
>Note: If you like to delete files in this directory, you must set their
>access-right to "rwx" for owner, group and others too.
>
>> Is it possible under Samba 19.18p10 to write from NT /NTFS to Linux 6.0
>> ext2fs?
>
>Yes, of course.
>
>Greetings
>Thomas
>
>P.S.: Sorry for my very bad englisch.
KH Lintz: It does'nt mind at all but first it was'nt bad and 2. we're all
still learning
>
>
>--
>Thomas Bader <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Powered by LINUX 2.0
>Infos und Tipps zu Linux, HowTo's des DLHP <http://surf.to/bader>
------------------------------
From: "Herminio Alvarez, Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Where can I get nmap for Linux?
Date: 22 Mar 1999 15:47:56 GMT
It is almost as if once the power of this utility was discovered, they took it off of
the "shelf".
If anyone knows where I can get this utility, let me know via post, email, or both.
**** Herminio
------------------------------
From: "Timebandit" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Denver Area LINUX Consultant Wanted
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 20:03:24 -0800
Did you ever get your reply to a linux contractor?
Jeff
Tom DeGerlia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>Hello,
>
>I was wondering if anyone could refer me to someone in the Denver area
>that would be willing to do a day or two of contract LINUX/network
>consulting (experienced). I run a small LAN (2 pc's, Pentium w/ Win98,
>and 486 100Mhz w/ LINUX) which is connected to the Internet via an ADSL
>connection. The network is currently working, however I need help in
>the following areas:
>
>1) Properly configuring the network (addresses, domain name, etc...)
>2) NFS and SAMBA configuration
>3) Security (Proxy,firewall)
>4) Router Configuration (Cisco 675 router)
>5) SendMail - Mail server setup
>
>I'm fairly good with LINUX, however I don't have the time to research
>and figure this stuff out myself. If you can recommend anyone please
>let me know or forward this message to the appropriate individual(s).
>
>Thank you very much.
>
>Tom DeGerlia
>
------------------------------
From: John Norman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What NIC to buy for Linux machine?
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1999 04:11:57 GMT
: I'm putting togethter a Linux machine for learning purposes and so
: forth...what NIC card would be the best to get with the least amount
: of headaches? Appreciate the help.
The DEC Tulip cards seem to be fast and reliable.
John
------------------------------
From: John Norman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Advice on NIC's and hubs
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1999 04:17:05 GMT
: I am a big fan of the D-Link Hubs, DSH-8 10/100 and then an extra Uplink
: port. I think they list for $155 in the US. Here in Toronto, I can find them
: for about $310
Ditto on the D-Link DSH 10/100 hubs. We got the 16port auto-sense,
and it was a great value. The NICs aren't my favorite though - VIA Rhine
Chip set. I like the DEC Tulip cards.
John
------------------------------
From: "Matt Anderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: No Internet Access
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 23:20:18 -0500
Ummmmm, yeah i already thought of that. That was sort of my question. I
couldn't get it set up correctly in that manner. I don't know what I did
(cause I did many things at the same time) but it works now. Thank you, I
am a newbie, and I know I ask dumb questions, so thanks for putting up with
me. It works great now (I just wish I could afford the $100/month for a T1
connection). I am really drunk, so I must go now. Thanks,
Matt Anderson
Curt wrote in message ...
>Dumb question: Have you setup Netscape to use the proxy server?
>Edit->Preferences->Advanced->Manual Proxy Configuration
>
>
>Matt Anderson wrote in message
><1ZvK2.13430$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>>You all have been such a great help. Don't think I've ever learned so
much
>>about anything in so little time. Anyway, here's my next problem. I've
>>been trying to proxy my internet connection from windows to linux. It's
so
>>close to working, but I've finally become stuck. Forever and ever
Netscape
>>told me it couldn't find a DNS entry for the page, i.e. something wasn't
>>configured right. I got past that, and Netscape looks like it's
>connecting,
>>but then it tells me that the page has no data. Happens for every page I
>>try. I'm thinking it's either the socks host isn't setup right, or the
>>http. I've got them pointing directly to my server, on the appropriate
>>ports. I'm using winproxy. If it helps:
>>
>>192.168.55.2 = Windows
>>192.168.55.1 = Linux
>>Netcape: proxy settings
>> HTTP = 192.168.55.2:80
>>SOCKS = 192.168.55.2:1080
>>
>>Do I need to direct it to only one of the servers perhaps? I'm so close,
>>any tips would be great. Thanks again
>>
>>Matt Anderson
>>
>>
>
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bill Unruh)
Subject: Re: Automatically "startx"
Date: 26 Mar 1999 04:16:49 GMT
In <01be77dc$0f074e00$227bcdd0@PANTHER> "Russell S. DiPesa"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> How do I automatically run startx so that I don't have to do a console
>based login and then do an Xwindows based login? I tried setting the xdm
>runlevel to lower levels (from 5 to 4 to 3), but the best I could get was a
>console-base login, then Xwindows started on its own, and then an Xwindows
>based login.
Wrong way. If you want to use xdm, you make the default run level be5
rather than 4.
However, if you want X to start up once you have logged in on the
console, leave xdm alone. Just put startx into your .bash_profile file.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bill Unruh)
Subject: Re: Dialing into Linux box
Date: 26 Mar 1999 04:19:42 GMT
In <01be77dd$d8cf61e0$227bcdd0@PANTHER> "Russell S. DiPesa"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>To all,
> I have RH5.2 and am trying to dial into the modem that I have connected to
>it. I have added the necessary line to "inittab" to respawn mgetty for
>each new call. I am able to dial the modem and get a handshake from it.
>But, after attempting to negotiate the username and password, it
>disconnects. I believe I have the proper permissions set for the username
>that I am dialing in with. Any suggestions?
Set up pppd debugging (
debug
in /etc/ppp/options
and
daemon.* /var/log/messages
in /etc/syslog.conf, after which do
killall -1 syslogd)
Then look at how the ppp negotiation is going.
or if you are just wanting to log in in terminal mode, check the
/etc/mgetty*/login.config file as to what you are asking for.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Even innocent people need privacy
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1999 03:41:05 GMT
We're really off topic here, but I can't help but say my $.02 when this comes
up. First the right to privacy is a principle, once the government has taken an
inch they've quit recognising the principle and it's only a matter of time until
they it becomes very clear they that is the case. Second, closely related, the
first tool to use when analysing any government action is the slippery slope,
it's the nature of the beast. They will start with some violation of freedom,
for a 'good' cause, then they get used to it and it expands. If we want to have
ANY privacy in the future we have to jealously protect it today, even if it
might seem extreme.
On Fri, 19 Mar 1999 11:28:16 +1100, Leo Cambilargiu
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I agree with this idea COMPLETELY. If the idea that people do wrong is a
>good enough excuse to violate our privacy, and the attitude that if we do
>nothing wrong is an excuse for us not to complain, then the violation of
>our privacy has nothing to do with being right or wrong. Just someone
>elses interest.
>
>The minds behind the observation systems are simply motivated by self
>interest, regardless of right or wrong. If you toss money at the man, he
>will jump straight into bed.
>
>LCamBilARgiu
>
>On Fri, 19 Mar 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> There's this attitude that if you're not doing anything wrong, then you
>> shouldn't worry about lack of privacy. That's wrong; here are examples.
>>
>> - Do you want potential thieves to know that you're going on vacation?
>> Do you want them to be able to find what alarm company you subscribe to,
>> if any?
>>
>> - Do you want your competitor to know about the product you're developing,
>> or the employee you're thinking of hiring? In fact, executives who
>> fly private planes are now bitching about a public database that lets you
>> type in the number of a plane and retrieve its current flight path.
>>
>> - Are you so sure that you're innocent? Here's what local police often
>> do to trap men in alleged rape cases. The woman says it was rape; the man
>> says it was consensual. The police are quite sympathetic to the man, and
>> ask him to describe what actually happened, in great detail. Then they
>> charge him with sodomy in addition to rape. Since he admitted to sodomy,
>> which is often still illegal but few people know that, he hasn't a chance,
>> even if the sex was consensual.
>>
>> -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
>> http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
>>
>>
------------------------------
From: miguel cervantes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Direct connect two linux computers: something's wrong
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1999 04:22:40 GMT
===============_4D4801625D9408A461C0
Content-Description: filename="text1.txt"
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; name="text1.txt"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
On 3/25/99, 9:15:15 PM, Georg Oehl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote regarding=20
Direct connect two linux computers: something's wrong:
I hope this help!!!
I don't have the same setup but i do have 3 pc connected.
My routing table looks like this
127.0.0.0 * 255.0.0.0
10.0.0.0 * 255.255.255.0
and my machines ips are linux box 10.0.0.1
win98 box 10.0.0.11
win98 box 10.0.0.12
if i'm not wrong don't need to include the other's machines if both=20
are in the same netwrok ( 10.0.0.0 ) the only diference in my ip=20
routing table is when i login on the net then a change to this
(INTERNET IP #) * 255.255.255.255 PPP0
127.0.0.0 * 255.0.0.0 ETH0
10.0.0.0 * 255.255.255.255 ETH0
DEFAULT (INTERNET IP #) 0.0.0.0 PPP0
AND when i logoff line 1 and 4 are gone again=20
In my network setting i don't have a default gateway for the linux box=20
and my eth0 has a netmask of 255.255.255.0 i added that, then i do=20
connect my win98's boxes to the internet using linux ipfoward so in my=20
win98's my dns is my ISP ( of course) but my gateway is my linux box (=20
10.0.0.1 ) and i still able to see the other machines on line o no on=20
line I hope this help !! =09
> ---------- Begin route.conf on "A" --------------
> # default 192.168.0.1
> <static IP-no> 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255
> ippp0
> 192.168.1.3 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 =
=20
eth1
> 192.168.1.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0
> eth0
> default <static IP-no>
> ---------- End route.conf on "A" --------------
> "B"'s "route.conf" file reads:
> ---------- Begin route.conf on "B" --------------
> 192.168.1.4 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 =
eth0
> default 192.168.1.4
> ---------- End route.conf on "B" --------------
> "A"'s eth1 IP-address is 192.168.1.4 and "B"'s eth0 IP-address is
> 192.168.1.3.
> I'm using Linux 2.0.36 (SuSE 6.0 distr.).
> What am I doing wrong ?
> Georg
===============_4D4801625D9408A461C0
Content-Description: filename="text1.html"
Content-Type: text/html; name="text1.html"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>Re: Direct connect two linux computers: something's wrong</TITLE=
>
<META NAME=3D"GENERATOR" CONTENT=3D"StarOffice/5.0 (Unix)">
<META NAME=3D"CREATED" CONTENT=3D"19990325;23063300">
<META NAME=3D"CHANGEDBY" CONTENT=3D"miguel cervantes">
<META NAME=3D"CHANGED" CONTENT=3D"19990325;23223800">
<STYLE>
<!--
-->
</STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<PRE>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=
Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<&l=
t;<<<<
On 3/25/99, 9:15:15 PM, Georg Oehl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote regardin=
g Direct connect two linux computers: something's wrong:
I hope this help!!!
I don't have the same setup but i do have 3 pc connected.
My routing table looks like this
127.0.0.0 * 255.0.0.0
10.0.0.0 * 255.255.255.0
and my machines ips are linux box 10.0.0.1
win98 box 10.0.0.11
win98 box 10.0.0.12
if i'm not wrong don't need to include the other's machines if both are =
in the same netwrok ( 10.0.0.0 ) the only diference in my ip routing tab=
le is when i login on the net then a change to this
(INTERNET IP #) * 255.255.255.255 PPP0
127.0.0.0 * 255.0.0.0 ETH0
10.0.0.0 * 255.255.255.255 ETH0
DEFAULT (INTERNET IP #) 0.0.0.0 PPP0
AND when i logoff line 1 and 4 are gone again=20
In my network setting i don't have a default gateway for the linux box a=
nd my eth0 has a netmask of 255.255.255.0 i added that, then i do conne=
ct my win98's boxes to the internet using linux ipfoward so in my win98'=
s my dns is my ISP ( of course) but my gateway is my linux box ( 10.0.0.=
1 ) and i still able to see the other machines on line o no on line I =
hope this help !! =09
> ---------- Begin route.conf on "A" --------------
> # default 192.168.0.1
> <static IP-no> 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.2=
55
> ippp0
> 192.168.1.3 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 =
eth1
> 192.168.1.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0
> eth0
> default <static IP-no>
> ---------- End route.conf on "A" --------------
> "B"'s "route.conf" file reads:
> ---------- Begin route.conf on "B" --------------
> 192.168.1.4 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 =
eth0
> default 192.168.1.4
> ---------- End route.conf on "B" --------------
> "A"'s eth1 IP-address is 192.168.1.4 and "B"'s =
eth0 IP-address is
> 192.168.1.3.
> I'm using Linux 2.0.36 (SuSE 6.0 distr.).
> What am I doing wrong ?
> Georg</PRE>
</BODY>
</HTML>
===============_4D4801625D9408A461C0==
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bill Unruh)
Subject: Re: Too Frequent Dial ( DNS/Ipfwadm/Diald)
Date: 26 Mar 1999 04:22:53 GMT
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "D. C. Sessions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
]>
]> Well apart from the actual requests when the link comes up and down when
]> requested by the win95 users it also is coming up at various times with
]> obvious user promptingno win95 user shown in the dialmon queue. I believe
]> that this indicates that it is the linux box itself bringing the link up.
]This went away when I turned off innd, which was trying to poll a
]default news server at uu.net
And turn off all other useless (:-) daemons-- especially gated, named
and sendmail daemon. You need none of those.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
