Linux-Networking Digest #946, Volume #10 Fri, 23 Apr 99 03:13:59 EDT
Contents:
Re: What Would Be A Very Capable... (K Lee)
file/print sharing with win9x/nt on ipx ("William Owen")
thinkpad mwave modem--any new news? (Mark Krischer)
Re: Help! Vicious IP triangle! ("Gene Heskett")
Re: QUESTION ? What are the IP bandwidth limitations of Linux ? (me zawadzki)
Re: IP Masquerading Problem (David)
D-Link de-528ct driver complie error ("Kanji Hirani")
ncpfs help (idexx laboratories)
RedHat client sends DHCPDISCOVER, server hears and sends DHCPOFFER that (Grendel)
Re: SIOCADDRT: Invalid argument (Javier Prieto)
Re: ipfwadm question (Joseph Tweed)
Re: Apache-SSL, mod_ssl, and RedHat Secure Web Server ("Ralf S. Engelschall")
mars_nwe persistent connections (Jakub Skopal)
Re: Network Win98 with Linux? ("Ng, Choon Hooi")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: K Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What Would Be A Very Capable...
Date: 23 Apr 1999 03:59:50 GMT
Ian Lunam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: Personally, I'd say anything from a 486DX4/100 w/16M upwards.
: I was running a P60 w/16M for the job and it hummed. Now I'm running a P150
: w/32 and it sits there with it's thumb up it's arse. Linux is very light on
: hardware.
hehehe...like that, "thunb up it's arse"...anyway, thanks for the info,
but what NIC are you using with that? Thanks.
Steve
: K Lee wrote in message <7fonol$h28$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
: >system which is to be used for just routing purposes or to be used as a
: >gateway for my home network?
: >
: >I have cable modem and I'd like to setup a network in my house and I
: >understand that you don't need a top of the line computer to do that. But
: >what type of processor, how much RAM, how much HD space, and what type of
: >NICs would make a very nice box for that purpose so that none of the
: >performance issues are compromised?
: >
: >The 2 computers which will be in that network are:
: >
: >PII 300(before celeron) w/3Com 905. I'm using this box right now w/dual
: >boot, w/2 HDs, one w/Windows98 and the other has Linux on it, but plan to
: >take one HD out to put into the new box.
: >
: >And I plan to get a Celeron box with a Linux compatible NIC, perhaps the
: >same one as the one I have now.
: >
: >Thank you very much in advance.
: >
: >Steve
--
With Best,
Steve *calloc(1,sizeof(geek))
======================================================================
void main (void) { if (windows=="useful") hell=frozen }
**********************************************************************
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "William Owen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: file/print sharing with win9x/nt on ipx
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 04:42:54 GMT
Have several home PCs networked peer to peer on a home ethernet. Two win 98
boxes have assigned IPs and connect to the internet via a cable modem which
is connected to the hub. (each PC running tcp/ip has a firewall installed).
The other machines do not run tcp/ip. All PCs do file and print sharing via
IPX.
I have just installed linux (mandrake RH5.2 -kde) on one box and need to
share files and printer with my win machines. (The NIC is setup and I can
connect to the net if I temporarily give the Linux machine on of my assigned
IPs.) SAMBA seems like the obvious answer, but I believe it requires
TCP/IP. I do not see how I can use TCP/IP because, even assuming that I can
assign local only IP addresses to my non internet machines (Will cable modem
pass these IPs to the net??), they will not be on the same subnet as the
assigned IP addresses on my two internet connected boxes. Any
suggestions?
Although I know a bit about NT networking, I'm a Linux newbie (and future
convert if I can get things running right), so I appreciate any advice.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1999 08:24:52 -0400
From: Mark Krischer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: thinkpad mwave modem--any new news?
has anyone heard anything (even rumors) about whether ibm will be
supporting the mwave modems on linux?
i've been looking at thinkpads (particularly the new 570), and i'd love to
be able to take advantage of that and save some money on the ethernet
pcmcia card.
and while we're on the topic of laptops, has anyone found a fix for the
suspend/resume kills sound, and the swap internal/external shifts the
window problems with the neomagic chips?
thanks.
--mk
===========================================================================
"The amount of 'clue' on the Internet is constant,
but the size of the Internet is growing exponentially." -- Unknown
------------------------------
Date: 21 Apr 99 07:14:40 -0500
From: "Gene Heskett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Help! Vicious IP triangle!
Reply to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Gene Heskett sends Greetings to technoteacher ;
> I was hoping that I would be able to find some helpful, knowledgable
> people on this list to help me with a serious problem. Please
> forgive the long message.
> Student A at a USA university supposedly got one or more threatening
> messages that look like they are coming from our system here in the
> Middle East because of the supposed originating IP. I am also
> hearing from the university police that it may be that someone
> posing as student A may have sent threatening messages to third
> parties also using our system IP. Because I did not get along with
> Student A in the past, the university is actually charging me with
> this, even though they only have our IP and do not have any
> confirming server use records from our server to implicate me. Since
> I did not do this, I am trying to find out how this could have
> happened. Unfortunately, we have a new internet server that until
> very recently did not even have software that kept a log of
> individual internet site users. Now we have upgraded the firewall
> and such.
> The only way, it seems, that I can try to clear myself is to list
> and briefly explain the different ways this could have happened,
> that is, how someone could have sent threatening messages through
> hotmail and in such a way that it looks like the messages originated
> from our system. I was advised to seek help from newsgroups. I
> should mention that being overseas I would find it very difficult to
> get books on the subject, though I could be directed to sites on the
> internet.
> I really need your help. How did this happen? How can I explain
> it? Now I have to hire a lawyer back in the states to represent me
> there and I need the information to defend myself.
> I have included the e-mail header below. If there are any 'typos'
> in the e-mail header assume it is due to scanning.
The header didn't get here. It looks like dejanews clipped it to put
there footer on. Buncha dumbasses.
> Thank you very, very much.
> By the way, I hope that I was right to be this trusting. You people
> are all very intelligent and talented with computers and I hope that
> no one will use this information to do get into our system. This is
> a military unit and the people here would go bonkers if anything
> happened.
> Technoteacher
> -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network
> ==---------- http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss,
> or Start Your Own
Cheers, Gene
--
Gene Heskett, CET, UHK |Amiga A2k Zeus040 50 megs fast/2 megs chip
Ch. Eng. @ WDTV-5 |A2091,GuruRom,1g Seagate,CDROM,Multiface III
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> or |Buddha + 4 gig WDC drive, 525 meg tape
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>|Stylus Pro, EnPrint, Picasso-II, 17" vga
RC5-Moo! 22kkeys/sec isn't much, but it all helps
--
------------------------------
From: me zawadzki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: QUESTION ? What are the IP bandwidth limitations of Linux ?
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1999 08:29:56 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
We have much, much more Unix expertise in house then NT. And we are a
tech company, I'd like to think very confident.
Actually, things were made more clear to me yesterday where the "real"
bottleneck resided. The application is a Satellite receiver with forward
error correction. The transmitter/receiver software is a 3rd party
(Probita) port to NT of that entities Unix version. The Unix version
has no problem receiving data at high rates; however the NT version
cannot unload the data @ > 2Mbps. We would still like to consider
moving our operations to a Unix/Intel system. Whether that is to
be Linux, Sun, etc. it is TBD.
Sorry about the confusion.
Jan Johansson wrote:
>
> And also... and this is NOT to start a OS flame war. But remember
>
> "Linux is only free if your time is worthless" (quote origin unknown) Do you
> really have the compentence in your company to set linux up in a productive
> enviroment?
------------------------------
Subject: Re: IP Masquerading Problem
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David)
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 01:40:15 GMT
Hi,
I think your problem is the order of the rules. They are checked sequentially
and the search terminates on the first best match.
Thus, I believe your line 'ipfwadm -a deny' is a typo and should read
'ipfwadm -p deny'... as the first line in your forwarding rules would default
to "deny all addresses on any interface" and end there (using the '-a').
Probably what happened is that since you are not flushing the rules at
all they are continually appended and you somehow had a correct rule
originally and the invalid '-a'one was somehow appended behind it.
Thus when you reboot your machine they indeed get flushed and the masq thing
won't work anymore.
Try this as your script instead...
#!/bin/sh
#flush rules
ipfwadm -I -f
ipfwadm -O -f
ipfwadm -F -f
#default forwarding policy of deny
ipfwadm -F -p deny
#masquerade your localnet
ipfwadm -F -a m -S 192.168.0.0/24 -D 0/0
#--------
The default policies for incoming and outgoing should be sufficient. Also,
it is in all practicality impossible for your ISP to detect and/or block
masquerading. The rest of your setup looks correct.
Hope this helps,
Dave
In article <01be8d08$df96a840$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
says...
>
>Have you ever had a case of "now you see it, now you don't" ? Here's mine.
>
>I have had IP Masquerading working successfully for several days now; I run
>RedHat 5.2, kernel version 2.0.36-0.7. By running successfully I mean that
>all clients on the LAN, all Windows 95 and Windows NT machines, could, via
>the Linux box:
>* Ping remote sites
>* Use mail and news services
>* Access remote web sites
>
>After about four or five days, IP Masquerading no longer worked, I was able
>to access the Internet from the Linux box, but no longer from any of the
>clients. I can guarantee that:
>* No errors occurred on boot up
>* No further configuration changes were made, either to the Linux box or
>any of the clients
>
>To troubleshoot, I went back to the IP Masqueading and PPP HOWTOs, and
>proceeded to check my configuration against these documents. I could not
>see a problem in my configuration; it tallied with the abovementioned
>documentation.
>
>So, my first question is: Can ISP policy have a bearing on how IP
>Masquerading performs ?
>
>My second question: Could someone please look over the following
>configuration information, and perhaps point something that I may have
>missed, or give some helpful suggestion ?
>
>* This implements IP Masquerading. I got this straight from the relevant
>HOWTO.
>Contents of /etc/rc.d/rc.local ============================================
>#!/bin/bash
># Set up IP Masquerading
># Install devices. Must be done this way (kerneld cannot load them)
>/sbin/depmod -a
>/sbin/modprobe ip_masq_ftp
>/sbin/modprobe ip_masq_raudio
>/sbin/modprobe ip_masq_irc
>
># Set up Firewall
># Following needed only if you have bootp
>ipfwadm -F -a deny
>ipfwadm -F -a m -S 192.168.0.0/24 -D 0.0.0.0/0
>
># Define your Default Policy
>ipfwadm -F -p masquerade
>
># Set ip_forward value
>echo "1" > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward
>===========================================================================
>
>* Initiates the PPP session. Does no more than call the default script and
>configuration file
>Contents of /root/pppstart.sh =============================================
>#!/bin/bash
># Log in to ISP on device ppp0
>/etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifup-ppp daemon
>/etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-ppp0 &
>===========================================================================
>
>* Log entries showing successful (I think) commencement of a PPP session.
>Contents of /var/log/messages =============================================
>Apr 22 14:54:34 linux001 chat[1415]: Entering PPP Session.^M
>Apr 22 14:54:34 linux001 chat[1415]: IP address is 139.134.221.16^M
>Apr 22 14:54:34 linux001 chat[1415]: MTU is 1524.^M
>Apr 22 14:54:39 linux001 chat[1415]: alarm
>Apr 22 14:54:39 linux001 chat[1415]: send (^M)
>Apr 22 14:54:39 linux001 chat[1415]: send (^M)
>Apr 22 14:54:39 linux001 pppd[1410]: Serial connection established.
>Apr 22 14:54:40 linux001 pppd[1410]: Using interface ppp0
>Apr 22 14:54:40 linux001 pppd[1410]: Connect: ppp0 <--> /dev/cua1
>Apr 22 14:54:43 linux001 pppd[1410]: local IP address 139.134.221.16
>Apr 22 14:54:43 linux001 pppd[1410]: remote IP address 139.134.19.19
>===========================================================================
>
>* Route table; gateway entries seem ok
>Output from route command =================================================
>Kernel IP routing table
>Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use
>Iface
>139.134.19.19 * 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0
>ppp0
>localnet.domain * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 34
>eth0
>127.0.0.0 * 255.0.0.0 U 0 0 23 lo
>default 139.134.19.19 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0
>ppp0
>===========================================================================
>
>* IP Configuration
>Output from ifconfig command ==============================================
>eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:40:05:E1:D1:5D
> inet addr:192.168.0.4 Bcast:192.168.0.255 Mask:255.255.255.0
> UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
> RX packets:1391 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
> TX packets:574 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
> collisions:0
> Interrupt:12 Base address:0x280
>
>ppp0 Link encap:Point-to-Point Protocol
> inet addr:139.134.221.16 P-t-P:139.134.19.19 Mask:255.255.0.0
> UP POINTOPOINT RUNNING MTU:1524 Metric:1
> RX packets:7 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
> TX packets:7 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
> collisions:0
> Memory:1b8c038-1b8cc04
>===========================================================================
>
>Any help would be greatly appreciated.
>
>Anthony Borla.
>
>
------------------------------
From: "Kanji Hirani" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: D-Link de-528ct driver complie error
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1999 14:11:32 +0100
Dear people,
I have D-Link DE-528ct card which has RTL8029 chip and I have a driver
rtl8028.c, but I can't remember the syntax to compile this driver so that I
can use it. Please help!!.
Thanks
Kanji
------------------------------
From: idexx laboratories <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: ncpfs help
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1999 13:19:02 GMT
I've recently been struggling to make ncpfs work on my Linux box. I've followed
the instructions to the letter, included IPX and ncpfs in the kernel, did a Make
and Make install, did a ipx_configure --auto_interface=on --auto_primary=on, and
ifconfig reports my ipx interface on eth0 is ready to rock. Do a slist and
nothing. Do a ncpmount, nothing. It just sits there until I press control-c.
Anybody got any ideas ?
Regards, Nick
------------------------------
From: Grendel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RedHat client sends DHCPDISCOVER, server hears and sends DHCPOFFER that
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1999 13:19:13 GMT
Hi,
I work in an office whose DHCP server is a FreeBSD 2.2.5 box, and I'm
trying to get DHCPcd to work on a RedHat 5.2 box. After much anguish,
I've been able to get to the point where the RedHat box sends out a
DHCPDISCOVER message (see figure 3 in rfc2131) with the client hardware
address that matches the ethernet adapter's just fine (SMC Ultra in an
ISA slot by the way), the FreeBSD box receives it and replies with a
DHCPOFFER message containing an IP address, but the RedHat box times out
complaining of "no DHCPOFFER messages." This is in an office with a mix
of Macintoshes, Windows (95, 98, NT), a sprinkling of FreeBSD and
OpenBSD, and one other RedHat box that I know of, all happily churning
along on DHCP.
Any ideas would be much appreciated.
Best regards,
Grendel
------------------------------
From: Javier Prieto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: SIOCADDRT: Invalid argument
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1999 12:12:15 GMT
In article <7ffgre$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
kite@NoSpam.%inetport.com (Clifford Kite) wrote:
> Kernel 2.2.x ? Try
> /sbin/route add -net 127.0.0.0 netmask 255.0.0.0 lo
> and read the linux/Documentation/Changes file.
Thanks for both advices, now everything works properly :)
Javier Prieto
Optima Technologies, Sevilla (Spain)
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
============= Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ============
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
From: Joseph Tweed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: ipfwadm question
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 21:28:53 +0200
"Sean S. Hardesty" wrote:
> I'm running an IP masquerading box, which works under kernel 2.0.35. I
> recently tried to upgrade to kernel 2.2.6, and now, whenever I run
> ipfwadm, I get:
>
> ipfwadm: setsockopt failed: Invalid argument
>
> Any ideas?
>
You could try using ipchains. I hear this replaces ipfwadm for kernels
2.2.x.
------------------------------
From: "Ralf S. Engelschall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.infosystems.www.servers.unix,linux.redhat.rpm,linux.redhat.misc
Subject: Re: Apache-SSL, mod_ssl, and RedHat Secure Web Server
Date: 21 Apr 1999 13:26:18 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In comp.infosystems.www.servers.unix [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> In article <DYYS2.30$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "Jordan Krushen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> S P Arif Sahari Wibowo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > I also want to know which one better, Apache-SSL or mod_ssl? I found
>> > arguments for using mod_ssl, but nothing for Apache-SSL.
>
>> Seriously though, I found ApacheSSL's implementation to be horrible. It
>> feels (to me) like a quick hack someone did to patch Apache. mod_ssl (while
>> based on ApacheSSL, originally) is a very well laid out module, has the
>> *best* documentation I've seen for a module (www.engelschall.org has great
>> docs not just on the module, but on SSL in general), and overall just comes
>> across as the better of the two. I've played with both, and I'll never
>> consider using ApacheSSL when mod_ssl is an option.
>
> Okay, I've been pushing the claim that they're different names for the same
> thing, which is apparently wrong.
>
> Just what the hell *is* ApacheSSL if it's not Apache with mod_ssl enabled?
> I've never heard that name used in any other context.
Apache-SSL is "Apache-SSL" and you can find it under
http://www.apache-ssl.org/. mod_ssl is an alternative solution with just a not
such cool name and you can find under http://www.engelschall.com/sw/mod_ssl/.
mod_ssl is originally based on Apache-SSL, although now (after one year of
development and heavy cleanups) only approx. 5-10% of the original code is
left.
Ralf S. Engelschall
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.engelschall.com
------------------------------
From: Jakub Skopal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: mars_nwe persistent connections
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1999 10:48:37 GMT
Hello,
I've a problem with mars_nwe. When the dos/or/windows client reboots, the
client-process on Linux doesn't end (even after any timeout, or if any other
client accesses the server from the same IPX address). I'd like to know,
whether it is possible to change this behaviour. All connections are now
stacking on the Linux Box and I've to kill the processes manually, which is
not correct, of course..
thankx, Jakub Skopal
--
Jakub Skopal
============= 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: Re: Network Win98 with Linux?
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 10:20:48 +0800
I suppose both of them are not connected, or they are? Anyway, if you want to
really want both machines to "talk" to each other, e.g telnet, ftp, etc, you got
have network card on both machines. Then have a cross cable to connect them
together. You got to configure the network setup first. On the Linux side,
assuming you got the nic detected upon booting up, do a 'netconf' and set up the
ip address for this machine. Just follow the instructions as netconf prompts
you. Having done that, do a 'ping localhost' and see if it's setup. If it is ok,
then do a 'ping <ip address that you hv just set in netconf>'. If that works,
then you have pretty much got you network and nic up and running. On the Win95,
setup the ip addr and stuff. Ping itself to see if you have the win95 network
setup. Once you have these 2 things configured, trying pinging Linux from win95,
and vice versa. That should work. You might want to pick up a copy of the howto.
It explains all these in there.
ch
Florin wrote:
> I am getting excited about Linux, yet it's still a stranger to me.
>
> I would appreciate any help on how to get the Linux machine talk to Win98. I
> already have Apache running on Linux and O'Reilly web server running on
> Windows but communication is only one way.
>
> Thank you so much.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
