Linux-Networking Digest #913, Volume #10 Mon, 19 Apr 99 05:13:46 EDT
Contents:
Re: PPTP & Linux, success and failure... ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Plug-in NIC for parallel port?? ("Ng, Choon Hooi")
Login as root (Francisco Romero)
Re: Beowulf clusters (Glenn Butcher)
Re: Web Mail Server for Linux? ("Gray McCord")
Firewall and socks5? (Alexander Stanovoy)
Linux and SCSI - SCAM? (Richard Preston)
telnet to ISP (Qozmoe)
Re: Linux and SCSI - SCAM? (Richard Preston)
Re: FTP connections through an ISPs Firewall ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
download some software for windows 95/98/NT ("Upali Weerasinghe")
ip tunneling (Damon Snyder)
Re: setting up DHCP for cablemodem (Stephen Carville)
kernel: neighbor table overflow? (Pavel Louzan)
Sendmail Alias DB problems... Try #2... (Nathan Ranger)
Re: 3c509B and 3c905B in same box (Phil DeBecker)
Re: Using smbmount (Richard Torkar)
Re: Linux - My honest opinion ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: PPTP & Linux, success and failure...
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1999 22:19:56 GMT
Hey, I noticed you have been able to connect to a PPTP server using a multi
homed box. I am trying to connect to the server at work, using my linux box,
and Scott Ananian's pptp client. I dont quite know how to configure it
because I am not using pppd to connect to my isp. I hav 2 NICS in my box, 1
is for my localnet, and the other is connected to a MediaOne cablemodem
connection. I have read thru all of the rfc's and MS-CHAP stuff, and connot
for the life of me figure out how to configure the pppd part.
Can you give me any advice?
thanks in advance
Ken Springhetti
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
In article <7d8ojj$aq5$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Oh woe is me.
>
> I'm using C. Scott Ananian's PPTP client to connect to a remote PPTP server,
> and have been able to successfully test it connecting to a PPTP server on my
> local network here. The Linux box (RedHat 5.2, kernel 2.0.36) in question is
> multihomed, and has a permanent connection to the 'net via a second NIC.
>
> When I use the client to connect to a server at a remote office's server I get
> very difference behaviour, after the connection goes through, the pppd never
> gets beyond the initial LCP stage...
>
> pppd[1067]: Using interface ppp1
> pppd[1067]: Connect: ppp1 <--> /dev/ttya0
> pppd[1067]: sent [LCP ConfReq id=0x1 <magic 0x652b0274> <pcomp> <accomp>]
> last message repeated 9 times
> pppd[1067]: LCP: timeout sending Config-Requests
> pppd[1067]: Connection terminated.
> pppd[1067]: Exit.
>
> ...which is a problem.
>
> Topographically the test scenario (using the local network) and the real
> scenario are very similar, so what could be upsetting it so? An authentication
> problem should say so directly, as I saw in the test scenario.
>
> Any clues, hints, and proof of my outright idiocy most welcome :-)
>
> M.
>
> -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
> http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
>
============= Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ============
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
From: "Ng, Choon Hooi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Plug-in NIC for parallel port??
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 13:21:45 +0800
I just came across this ad in a magazine about this plug-in NIC for
parallel port. What it does is you can just plug in this device into
your parallel port and immediately it acts as a network card. It has 2
I/Os. One end is 25-pin connector for the parallel port, and another I/O
is the Rj45 for the network cable. So, I guess it is something like a
pcmcia nic, but it goes for the parallel port instead.
It comes with a very nice package, which immediately tells me that it is
not going to be cheap.
Anyway, anyone knows how complicated is it to convert/build this
parallel port to the RJ45 device?.
Btw, the site for that device is http://www.blackbox.co.uk
ch
------------------------------
From: Francisco Romero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Login as root
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1999 22:51:18 -0700
Is there a way to login as root remotely from telnet?
------------------------------
From: Glenn Butcher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Beowulf clusters
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1999 22:50:39 -0600
We did one in our distributed systems class a couple of quarters ago.
Used 4 486s, with one serving as a front end - it was dual-homed to the
other three machines, and then to our lab network so you could telnet
into it from any lab. Used Slackware 3.3, installed by hand on each
computer, then installed PVM 3.4, XPVM, and PVMPOV. Spent a few weeks
tinkering to get it all to work, to include importing the front-end's
/home directory on each machine and copying /etc/passwd to each to
duplicate the accounts. After some poking, worked great! We did some
rendering of the benchmark image and found speedup through 3 machines,
slowdown when we went to 4. Attributed it to network latency; we're
using a single 10BASE2 network.
Scrapped this cluster a week or so ago, now working on a 8-486 cluster
front-ended with a pentium 75. Installed Extreme Linux on the
front-end, and plan to conjure up a diskless boot kernel for the other
eight machines. Extreme is a great way to go, for it comes with all the
software pre-installed and configured. I am going to try to upgrade the
RedHat 5.0 base to 5.2, and a second ethernet to try channel-bonding.
This is so much fun...
There is a Beowulf-HOWTO now, available at sunsite.unc.edu (metalab??)
Glenn Butcher
"It's a parallel universe..." (Anon.)
Bob Jones wrote:
>
> Anybody have any experience setting up and maintaining a Beowulf
> cluster? I'm attempting one at my school as a project, and I'd like to
> have any advice or input that you can give. I currently have 10 486DX2
> 25MHz machines to use in the cluster; any advice on how I should
> properly set them up and all? (I have a slightly working configuration
> right now, but I want to incorporate the best ideas and use the best
> software and drivers that I can.) Thanks in advance for any advice/help!
>
> _ /
> \ /
> X
> / \_
> /
------------------------------
From: "Gray McCord" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Web Mail Server for Linux?
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1999 18:28:00 -0500
Thanks! I'll give it a try.
Gray
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
<7fd0r5$b7r$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>Haven't seen Exchange Server, but I use AtDot (http://www.atdot.org/), it
>seems to have plenty of options, it's GPL, it's Perl, it works. I think it
>checks POP accounts, so you'll need a POP server running if you don't
already
>have one.
>
>--
>/ http://www.David.Watters.net/ |^\ _. o _|
>| aim:DgWatters0 icq:5338012 |_/ (_| \/ | (_|
>| mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] \ / _. _|_ _|_ _ ._ _
>\ UK voice mail: 0845 660 4167 \/\/ (_| |_ |_ (/_ | _)
>
>
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "Gray McCord" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I run sendmail and Apache on my 2.0.35 Linux server and was wondering if
>> anyone knew of a solution to permit viewing users' email via a web
>> connection to the Apache server. For those that have seen it, I'm
looking
>> for something similar to the MS Exchange Server facility that lets users
>> access their Exchange mail via IE instead of using the Outlook client.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Gray
>>
>>
>
>-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
>http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
From: Alexander Stanovoy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Firewall and socks5?
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1999 20:44:51 +0300
Hello,
My problem is configuring socks5 of my linux-router based firewall.
I have two interfaces, external eth0 and internal eth1.
my socks5.conf is:
interface AAA.BBB.CCC. - eth1
interface - - eth0
permit - - - - -
When I'm triing to connect ICQ client through my socks5 server( started in
debug mode), i got the message
00650: UDP Proxy Established: (AAA.BBB.CCC.8:1363) for user
00650: UDP Receive: Selecting on outer sockets...
00650: UDP Receive: Selecting on inner socket...
00650: UDP Receive: Selecting...
00650: S5IOCheck: Checking socket status
00650: S5IOCheck: recv failed: Bad file descriptor
00650: Proxy: cleaning command context
00650: UDP Proxy Termination: (AAA.BBB.CCC.8:1363) for user ; 0 bytes out
0
bytes in
Maybe I need additional configuration for UDP packets forwarding ?
Or maybe some other?
What is wrong?
Please help.
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
Alexander Stanovoy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Internet and Intranet services developer and administrator
Lietelija Ltd., Juozapaviciaus 6/2, Vilnius 2005, Lithuania
Phone: +370-2-730970; FAX:+370-2-730959; Mobile:+370-99-14421
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Preston)
Subject: Linux and SCSI - SCAM?
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 00:23:15 GMT
My brother is using the Adaptec 2940UW SCSI controller with SCAM (whatever that
is). It didn't work with Red Hat 5.1 and I was wondering if anyone knew if it
works with Red Hat 5.2 or S.u.S.E. 6.0 or any other Linux distribution.
Thanks,
Richard
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Qozmoe)
Subject: telnet to ISP
Date: 19 Apr 1999 00:17:29 GMT
is it possible to make a terminal connection to a non-ppp server, telnet to a
ppp server and initiate the ppp connection there?
thanx,
qozmo
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Preston)
Subject: Re: Linux and SCSI - SCAM?
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 00:25:32 GMT
Oops, I ment to post this in comp.os.linux.hardware.
On Mon, 19 Apr 1999 00:23:15 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Preston) wrote:
>My brother is using the Adaptec 2940UW SCSI controller with SCAM (whatever that
>is). It didn't work with Red Hat 5.1 and I was wondering if anyone knew if it
>works with Red Hat 5.2 or S.u.S.E. 6.0 or any other Linux distribution.
>
>Thanks,
>Richard
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: FTP connections through an ISPs Firewall
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 07:19:37 GMT
In article <7fbpu9$d3t$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>
> I have been trying to set up an FTP server on my ADSL line. My ISP, Telus,
> has a firewall and I needed to bypass it as it would not take standard port
> connections (ie. 21 for FTP and 20 for FTP data channel). I found the
> appropriate services on my linux box and successfully changed the port
> addresses. Now my FTP is operating on ports 2121 FTP and 2120 FTP-data.
> Everything appeared to be going fine until I asked some of my friends to test
> it. My friends with dial-up connections were able to connect on these higher
> port connections under active FTP mode (but not passive), but my friends with
> cable modems and ADSL lines could login, but could not get a directory
> listing to appear under either active or passive FTP modes. This may be due
> to an illegal port connection error message which shows up.
>
> I speculate that the problem has to do with the fact that the computers are
> trying to connect with IP addresses that are their home computers and not the
> Internet's IP address (going through a router). Another Problem that i
> noticed was that when a computer tries to connect over the internet via
> passive mode it uses the IP address of my linux box's external interface (the
> network card that connects me to my cable modem) and not the Internet IP
> address that is assigned to me by Telus (the one people connect to).
>
> Another interesting point is that anyone who uses a DHCP server for their IP
> address can connect but static IPs can not.
>
> Another problem is the PASV command scripting. When the FTP client
attempts
> to connect to my FTP server in passive mode the server sends the client the
> command PASV 10.127.73.42 which is not the external IP address but the
> internal network interface that connects to the router modem. If anyone
> knows of a way to change this (other than recoding the FTP daemon, which i
> have already tried) it could solve all my problems.
>
> How can I get my friends with Cable/ADSL lines to connect? (With linux and
> Windows 95/98)
>
> Any comments are appreciated.
>
> Sincerely,
> Jeff
>
> -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
> http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
>
An interesting problem and if someone other than yourself would respond to
this message you might get an answer that told you something you did not
already know.
Could have something to do with an ip address forwarding program?
============= Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ============
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
From: "Upali Weerasinghe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.hacker,comp.protocols.tcp-ip.domains,comp.security.firewalls
Subject: download some software for windows 95/98/NT
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 07:33:41 GMT
I just installed a Ftp server, so I have some software, its free download
it.
and if you have any good software, please put it my incoming folder.
Note: don't try to upload over 10MB, because I setup quota for anonymous.
you know what I mean.
Here is my address ftp://upnet.dyndns.com
and please don't hack_me, because I am a Linux Guy, if you have any
comments, flame, blame email me [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thank you, good luck.
------------------------------
From: Damon Snyder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: ip tunneling
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1999 23:09:28 -0400
Question:
I'm trying to tunnel ip back and forth between 2 192.168
networks. The first one we will call sandbox A (192.168.0.*) and
the second on sandbox B (192.168.1.*). Sandboxes A and B are
geographically seperate and connected to the internet using 2
linux machines set up as routers (using ipchains and kernel 2.2.2).
I would like to combine the 2 sandboxes into one large sandbox
using ip tunneling (i.e. Tunnel traffic from sandbox A headed
for 192.168.1.* addresses to the router connected to sandbox B
and vice versa). I've compiled ip tunneling into the kernel
and I'm using the following command to create the tunnel:
#on sandbox A
#eth0 <ip of sandbox A>
#eth1 192.168.0.1
route add -net 192.168.1.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 dev tun10 gw <ip sandbox B>
#on sandbox B
#eth0 <ip of sandbox B>
#eth1 192.168.1.1
route add -net 192.168.0.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 dev tun10 gw <ip sandbox A>
I get the following error when I try to run the above route commands:
SIOCADDRT: Operation not supported by device
Any ideas? Please cc to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thanks,
Damon Snyder
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Stephen Carville <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: setting up DHCP for cablemodem
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1999 17:24:38 -0700
Benjamin Dixon wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I'm having trouble getting DHCP to work with my cable provider under linux
> though it works well under windows. I have dhcpcd 0.70 with the -h option
> and it seems to work right except for it assigns the ip of eth0 as 0.0.0.0
> everytime. I'm guessing this is because the ethernet card is not setup
> properly before the ifup script is run. I used to put my networking stuff
> (ifconfig, route, etc) in rc.local on my RedHat box so I'm wondering where
> these commands should actually go so as the card is considered "up" when
> ifup is run.
It is possible that your ethernet card is not setup but that will be pretty
hard to diagnose without some details. What kind of card? Which driver?
It is also possible you have fallen afoul of a known bug in dhcpcd-0.70.
Check your logs to see if you are receiving the DHCPOFFER message and are
sending a DHCPREQUEST. If you are but never receiving the DHCPACK then you
are probably a victim of the bug. When dhcpcd 0.70 sends the DHCPREQUEST
it encapsulates it in a BOOTP packets rather than a DHCP packet.
Consequently most forwarding agents simply drop it as irrevelant.
When I informed Redaht of the bug they advised I upgrade to pump-0.30 (?)
but I havn't been able to get it to compile on any 5.2 system. Maybe you
will have better luck.
--
Stephen Carville
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
====================================================
It's all right to have geniuses build systems for use by idiots, but
the path from laboratory to marketplace needs to go through the
proving ground of prudent engineering.
Peter Coffee
------------------------------
From: Pavel Louzan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: kernel: neighbor table overflow?
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 11:39:00 +0400
I repeatedly get the kernel messages of "neighbour table overflow", few
times a minute.
The machine runs kernel 2.2.3, RedHat 5.2.
What is the cause and what to do with this, please?
Pavel
------------------------------
From: Nathan Ranger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Sendmail Alias DB problems... Try #2...
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1999 19:30:07 -0400
I help a local ISP with some of their systems. Lately, the sysadmin and
I have been trying to get multiple domains to work with multiple
duplicate aliases. Here is what we want to do:
Domain xyz.com and domain abc.com (via the DNS MX entries) go to the
same machine (ie: Cwxyz.com and Cwabc.com are in the sendmail.cf)
however, both companies want a "sales@..." e-mail address. So, in the
/etc/aliase file I put:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:xyzguy
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:abcguy
However, when I do a "newaliases" is reports that there is a duplicate
aliases entry and only obeys one of them.
Are there any special characters I can put in the aliase file to take
care of this or some M4 mods that I can do in the .cf file? We're losing
customers to the NT guys down the street because of it.
-NR
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1999 22:53:22 -0400
From: Phil DeBecker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: 3c509B and 3c905B in same box
I have both these cards in my linux box as well. Getting them to work
together wasn't hard; I disabled PnP on the 3c509 (the ISA card!) and I
have the drivers for the cards built as loadable kernel modules. In my
/etc/conf.modules I have
alias eth1 3c509
alias eth0 3c59x
That's all you should need. You can't disable IRQ PnP on the PCI board
-- PCI is always plug and play.
Phil D.
------------------------------
From: Richard Torkar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Using smbmount
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 10:40:28 +0200
Jing Duan wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I have problem on using smbmount. I hope someone could help me out.
>
> I am using Slackware 3.6, kernel 2.0.35 and Samba 2.0.2. I have used kernel
> 2.2.4 and Samba 2.0.3, but the problem is the same.
>
> I have two pcs, one for Linux and one for Win95.
>
> I want to share the D drive in Win95 machine with Linux. I name the Win95
> machine as "main", the Linux as "hp" and the network as "home". So, I have
> hp.home and main.home on my network. The D drive is named as "main-d"
>
> I can use smbclient to access the d drive. I type,
> Jing Duan
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The smbmount u have on your system might not work with the newest SAMBA.
On the address below in the signatur you have a samba package with
smbmount/smbumount compiled.
And there you also have LinNeighborhood which might help you a bit.
Richard
--
http://milkyway.thn.htu.se/~ds98rito/
Hoping the problem magically goes away
by ignoring it is the "microsoft approach to programming"
and should never be allowed.
(Linus Torvalds)
============================================================
PGP Key ID / PGP Key Fingerprint:
D40BA0AD / C7 5D A3 B7 1A 28 7E CE E6 41 82 AE E6 EC 20 D1
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux - My honest opinion
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 08:25:29 GMT
In article <O22S2.2175$_a6.68700@paloalto-snr1>,
"A. Feiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Although MS OS' are mediocre to badly limited to exclude NT (and do not go
> there unless you really know to work with NT), they are accessible. When you
> fire up 95/98 9crap, you can navigate within seconds. If you want to win the
> market, you have to win the desktop, if you want to win the desktop it has
> to be user friendly.
Surely corporate users of Linux would be running the system as a SERVER not
a DESKTOP ?
I'm a hpux/solaris/sco/aix sysadmin. These systems do not have great user
interfaces when compared with 9x/NT but that's not what we buy them for.
We buy them to host multiuser applications.
I have experience of trying to use NT server for the same kind of thing, and
belive me (this not an anti MS rant but my professional opinion) I'll choose a
un*x os every time. I couldn't give two hoots for the gui - I want flexibility
and the scope to easily customise.
The Linux desktop is after all just an X windows manager - pretty much the
same as CDE which ships with the "comercial" un*x os versions.
Use Linux as a Server and let you clients use the 9x/NT desktop to connect to
them. Use a product for what it's good at.
--
########################################################################
# Paul Barker - Senior Systems Engineer (Technical) - Orange PLC - UK #
# The opinions expressed here are my own and may be incorrect. #
########################################################################
============= Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ============
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
