Linux-Networking Digest #2, Volume #11 Sat, 1 May 99 05:13:35 EDT
Contents:
ppp *server* trouble (Erik Myllymaki)
Re: Linux in nt domain (Mutt)
Re: why isnt mazquerading on by default? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: LPRng and a local printer (Bob)
Re: upgrading kernal .. how do ("Max Barawid Jr.")
ifconfig / ppp / route problem (Andy Geach)
Masquerading problem in 2.2.X (Konstantinos Agouros)
Linux/Win9X Lan. ("Thomas S. Martinson")
Re: Set up DNS to resolve hostname to hostname:port? (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: 3c59x : unresolved symbol(s) problem in linux v2.2.6 (Dustin Puryear)
Re: 3 com 3c905b TX network card problems... (Dustin Puryear)
Re: 4 port nic/hub configuration, help? (Dustin Puryear)
Re: can logon to isp, but cannot ping etc (Dustin Puryear)
ifconfig errors... (Sandeep Singh)
Re: Help! Linux on the Loose ("Andy Smith")
Have a problem with the connect() function: PLS help if u can (Gaurav Sehgal)
Re: ppp works but no ping (Clifford Kite)
Re: DHCP - UDP packet error between Win95 & Linux - need help! (Stephen Carville)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Erik Myllymaki)
Subject: ppp *server* trouble
Date: Sat, 01 May 1999 01:10:31 GMT
I am having some problems setting up a ppp *server* to allow backdoor
access to the network at work behind the firewall(PINGU) and to allow an
internet connection for my Macintosh at home:
This is what the network looks like:
Internet
|
|
???.???.???.??? (via DHCP)
_________
|firewall|
| PINGU |
|________|
192.168.0.1
|
|
|
____________________________________________________....
| | | |
. 192.168.0.3 (eth0) . .
. ___________ . .
. | KAISER |
|___________|
192.168.0.8 (ppp0)
|
|
|
192.168.0.9 (dial-up PPP)
____________
| Macintosh |
| |
_____________
I can connect via modem from the macintosh to KAISER and establish
a ppp connection (I can connect to the web server running on KAISER), but
I can't connect to the internet from the mac. I can't even ping PINGU. I
can connect to the Internet from KAISER just fine.
This is what my routing table looks like AFTER connecting via dial-up modem:
Kernel IP routing table
Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface
192.168.0.9 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 1 ppp0
192.168.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 6 eth0
127.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 U 0 0 2 lo
0.0.0.0 192.168.0.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 9 eth0
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks.
Erik Myllymaki
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
erik myllymaki
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mutt)
Subject: Re: Linux in nt domain
Date: Sat, 01 May 1999 05:09:06 GMT
On Wed, 28 Apr 1999 17:33:28 +0800, "Steve Yen"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I am currently having some integration problem with Linux Red Hat 5.2
>and Nt 4.0 Server.
Have you added the cleartext patch for your NT server? There's a known
issue with Windows NT (SP3 and higher) and 98 regarding plaintext
authentication (it doesn't affect any version of Win95 that I'm aware
of).
Check out the Microsoft Knowledge Base/TechNet -- there are Q-articles
for both NT and Win98 that tell you the reghack that's required. It's
something simple like finding the key and entering
ClearTextAuthentication=1, or similar.
I found them the other day on the MSKB by searching by keyword for
"samba authentication" (I think).
HTH,
--
Mutt :)
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Do NOT send me unsolicited commercial email.)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: why isnt mazquerading on by default?
Date: Sat, 01 May 1999 05:45:34 GMT
: Why arnt these features on by default?
: Is it to keep the kernal efficent as possible?
That along with the fact that most Linux machines
out there are not doing ip masquerading :)
--
---
Sometimes you can learn more by watching an idiot
than you can by listening to a genius.
------------------------------
From: Bob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: LPRng and a local printer
Date: Sat, 01 May 1999 01:17:00 -0400
Bob wrote:
> Kai-Uwe Reichert wrote:
>
> > cannot connect to lp@localhost, connection refused.
>
> debian 2.2
>
> I think I need to edit a file in /etc, but which one?
>
> lpq -a
>
> no connect permissions
>
Anything here for me to put in /etc/somefile?
ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/iana/assignments/port-numbers
printer 515/tcp spooler
printer 515/udp spooler
-Bob
------------------------------
From: "Max Barawid Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: upgrading kernal .. how do
Date: Sat, 01 May 1999 10:07:43 +0400
Go to http://metalab.unc.edu/LDP/HOWTO and read the Kernel-HOWTO. That
is where I started learning upgrading kernels. I am using now 2.2.6.
Good luck,
Max
John Hornblow wrote:
> Hi, do you just download it and dump it over the top of the old one?
> Surely it cant be that easy...
> Sounds like a good way to kill my linux?
>
> any good tutorials/ webpages on the topic
>
> Thankyou from a cold wet wellington [ good learn linux day]
>
> John
>
> =====================================================
> John Hornblow
> homepage http://homepage.ihug.co.nz/~johnhb/
> gliding page http://www.soar.co.nz/
> =====================================================
------------------------------
From: Andy Geach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: ifconfig / ppp / route problem
Date: Sat, 01 May 1999 09:55:34 +0800
I've got a mini home network (192.168.0.0) set up with two machines: a linux box
(192.168.0.2), and a mac (192.168.0.1) connected via crossover ethernet. Telnet,
ftp, web etc, all works great.
I've just got ppp running from the linux box to my ISP. Now I would like to
access the ppp interface from the mac, using the linux box as a router. Anyone
know how to set this up? I presume its just a case of adding another route
entry, but can't find any useful doco on this particular problem.
Set up is debian 2.1, using pppconfig/pon/poff etc, and the following
/etc/init.d/network script:
#! /bin/sh
echo 'ititializing network stuff...'
ifconfig lo 127.0.0.1
route add -host 127.0.0.1 lo
ifconfig eth0 192.168.0.2 netmask 255.255.255.0 broadcast 192.168.0.255
route add -net 192.168.0.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 eth0
Any help appreciated,
--
Andy Geach
Command and Control Information Systems, ADI Limited
20-22 Stirling Hwy Nedlands WA 6009 Australia
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
08 9333 8926
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Konstantinos Agouros)
Subject: Masquerading problem in 2.2.X
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 20:01:11 GMT
Hi,
since I migrated to 2.2 my masquerading does not work anymore.
I use the following Masquerading-Rules
ipchains -P forward DENY
ipchains -A forward -i isdn0 -j MASQ
IP-Forwarding is turned on.
What I see with tcpdump is the following:
The translated packet with SYN-Flag goes out of the isdn-interface correctly.
The server on the outside responds like he is supposed to with SYN-ACK. However
the answer never reaches my ethernet. I have some filter-rules for packets that
are supposed to reach my own machine, but I doubt that they are the problem,
since I should see that in my syslog-output.
I guess I have a wrongful kernel-config. The Masquerading-Options I put in the
kernel are:
CONFIG_IP_MASQUERADE=y
CONFIG_IP_MASQUERADE_ICMP=y
CONFIG_IP_MASQUERADE_MOD=y
CONFIG_IP_MASQUERADE_IPAUTOFW=m
CONFIG_IP_MASQUERADE_IPPORTFW=m
CONFIG_IP_MASQUERADE_MFW=m
A masqueraded ping works!
Anybody has a clue?
Konstantin
--
Dipl-Inf. Konstantin Agouros aka Elwood Blues. Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Otkerstr. 28, 81547 Muenchen, Germany. Tel +49 89 69370185
============================================================================
"Captain, this ship will not sustain the forming of the cosmos." B'Elana Torres
------------------------------
From: "Thomas S. Martinson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Linux/Win9X Lan.
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 21:39:47 -0500
Guy,
I think that you are starting off incorrectly. If you are having
problems. Just send me an email and I will try to help you out. I work
with this situation allot.
--
Thomas S. Martinson, Network Administrator: NT/Linux
Automotive Parts Headquarters, Inc.
125 South 29th Avenue
Saint Cloud, MN 56301
Linux: The Revolution of Choice.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Subject: Re: Set up DNS to resolve hostname to hostname:port?
Date: 30 Apr 1999 21:44:50 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
VanderBilt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>What I wanted to just NOT use sendmail. And I didn't want to use the POP
>facilities. Using POP means people still save mail locally, and then easily
>screw it up. This mainly what I wanted to not have.
If you want to store mail on the server there are two approaches. One
is to also set up a file server on the same or a different box, sharing
out the home directories with samba. Then you can run POP, using the
server drive as the 'local' store and it is still on a server with
proper backups. The other approach is to use IMAP where the mailbox
remains on the server. Netscape and Outlook handle either protocol.
IMAP is nicer if the users often access their mailbox from different
machines.
>And using a system like GW includes features that go way beyond mail.
Yes, but do you use them? If the boss uses the group scheduling feature
and insists on everyone else using it, it may be worthwhile. Otherwise
you are probably only using the addess book which can be done with
LDAP instead.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dustin Puryear)
Subject: Re: 3c59x : unresolved symbol(s) problem in linux v2.2.6
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 21:52:08 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, 27 Apr 1999 16:11:50 -1000, news wrote:
>Hi All,
>
>I was hoping someone can lend some insight into this problem. I used to run
>v2.0.35 of the kernel just fine, then I upgraded to v2.2.6 and now the
>module 3c59x.o doesn't work. I get the error
> /lib/modules/2.2.6/net/3c59x.o: unresolved symbol(s)
>when I do a depmod -a
Are you sure you selected 3Com 3C59x support as a module? Perhaps you
left it out and 3c59x.o is remnant code that shouldn't be there
(according to your linux kernel configuration).
--
Dustin Puryear
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dustin Puryear)
Subject: Re: 3 com 3c905b TX network card problems...
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 21:54:44 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 29 Apr 1999 16:37:21 -0400, Chris Cantwell wrote:
>Were you talking about the 3c509b (ISA PnP) card, perhaps??
>
>Jens Reinsberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:7ga2tv$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> csble> you need to disable plug/play in the card I have this card working
>under
>> csble> v2.0.36. and there are few newer to linux on the planet that I. :)
>>
>> Could you tell me please how to disable plug'n'play on a pci-card?
>>
>> Bye, Jennes
>
FWOI, I tried to install a 3Com 3C504B with Linux and could never get it
right. Everytime I ran 'ifconfig eth0 up' my PC would crash. Never did figure
out what the problem was. Anyone have similar problems?
--
Dustin Puryear
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dustin Puryear)
Subject: Re: 4 port nic/hub configuration, help?
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 21:56:22 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 29 Apr 1999 20:35:26 GMT, Mike Frisch wrote:
>On Thu, 29 Apr 1999 15:30:48 -0500, Scott MacDonald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Right now it shows up as eth0. But to activate the other three ports do I
>>just set it up as 4 seperate interfaces(eth0, eth1, eth2, eth3), or do I
>>just use ip aliasing(eth0:1, eth0:2, etc)? Any help would be greatly
>>appreciated!
>
>It's 4 distinct Ethernet interfaces, so you need an eth0: to eth3:
Four ethernet interfaces in one NIC? Is this type of card usually used in
gateway/router systems?
--
Dustin Puryear
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dustin Puryear)
Subject: Re: can logon to isp, but cannot ping etc
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 22:07:50 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, 27 Apr 1999 20:18:00 GMT, Neil Nadin wrote:
> Help!
>
>I have loaded Linux onto a Compaq 386 with 8mb Ram with an external
>modem US Robotics 14400.
>
>I can connect to my isp, but am unable to get a ping back. I have
>telephoned them, and I should get a ping back.
Did you put your ISP's nameserver address into /etc/resolv.conf? I didn't
see the file included in your message.
--
Dustin Puryear
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Sandeep Singh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: ifconfig errors...
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 23:01:41 -0400
Hello all,
I am also getting a LOT of errors as shown by ifconfig. Although the
networking set-up
seems to be working fine (as far as I can see). Can anybody tell me what
is going on
here? This is for a 3Com 905 card on RedHat 5.2 with kernel 2.2.5.
Thanks again...
Sandeep
lo Link encap:Local Loopback
inet addr:127.0.0.1 Bcast:127.255.255.255 Mask:255.0.0.0
UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:3924 Metric:1
RX packets:34 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0
TX packets:0 errors:2380 dropped:34 overruns:0
eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:17:4C:6C:DF:AD
inet addr:192.168.168.2 Bcast:192.168.168.255
Mask:255.255.255.0
UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
RX packets:1530 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0
TX packets:0 errors:203148 dropped:225 overruns:0
Interrupt:11 Base address:0xec00
------------------------------
From: "Andy Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Help! Linux on the Loose
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 23:44:47 -0400
Hi, do the machines that are taking a while to log in a DNS/NIS/hosts entry?
Users have reported similar problems with telnet ... the linux box tries to
resolve a hostname for any machine that connects to it. It hangs for a while
if it doesn't find one instantly. I'm not certain, but I think this may be a
property of tcp wrappers, so this statement would apply equally well to POP
as it doesn to TELNET. Try adding a hosts entry for each of the machines
that are taking a while to connect.
Cheers,
A.
Rick Kennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Hi all,
>
> Well we have cast off the Microsoft shackles and fired up a Linux mail
> server. We feel real good about this but we are experiencing a problem
> and have yet to find an answer. Perhaps somone here might help. The
> issue is that on our network, most desktops, when looking to retrieve
> mail, connect to the Linux box, send the login info, and get the mail
> lickety split. There are however a small number of desktops that quickly
> make the connection but take forever to send login information. We
> believe that we have the machines configured exactly the same way and
> are puzzled as to whether this is a Linux issue or a networking issue.
> Hence this post to linux.networking. Any clues as to what might be going
> wrong?
>
> Thanks Much
>
> Rick
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 01 May 1999 07:37:16 +0000
From: Gaurav Sehgal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Have a problem with the connect() function: PLS help if u can
Hi,
I wrote a basic network program in Linux Readhat 5.2 , but when i
compiled the program it gave me an error message for the following line:
connect(sd," parse",10);
the error message said : incompatible type for argument 2 of `connect'
I can't see the problem as in UNIX/Linux one can specify filenames in
the second parameter of the connect command to connect to a file rather
than a remote server.
I would be very obliged if anyone could help me with this problem.
thanks
gaurav
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: kite@NoSpam.%inetport.com (Clifford Kite)
Subject: Re: ppp works but no ping
Date: 30 Apr 1999 20:47:29 -0500
Keith Wright ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: I tried your suggestion but still not luck. Then I got desparate. I've
: been trying to solve this one for many hours. I was using an old I/O card
: (probably with an 8250 or 16450 as reported by setserial) and an external
: 33.6 Modem. Just for kicks I inserted a U.S. Robotics internal 33.6 modem
: on COM2. And low and behold it worked? I just don't get it? But at least
: ppp is now working. What I can't understand is why my 1st config wasn't
: working.... I was able to establish a ppp connection but that was it?
Using a 16450 UART with a modem configured for a speed greater than
14000 just won't work. There is a 10 byte buffer in a 16550A compared
to a 1 byte buffer in a 16450 and that difference is reflected in the
fact that a 16450 can't handle much more than 14000 when compressed
bytes are coming across the wire while a 16550A can do 38400+.
There's a lot of things that can be wrong and transparency problems are
usually the hardest to solve.
--
Clifford Kite <kite@inet%port.com> Not a guru. (tm)
------------------------------
From: Stephen Carville <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: DHCP - UDP packet error between Win95 & Linux - need help!
Date: Sat, 01 May 1999 01:27:44 -0700
Les Hazelton wrote:
>
> Stephen Carville wrote:
> >
> > Do you have a static route to 255.255.255.255/32 set up. I know it sounds
> > dumb but to talk to the NT95/98 clients you need a static route like:
> >
> > any net 255.255.255.255 netmask 255.255.255.255 gw eth0
>
> Stephen,
>
> If I set my Win95 system to have a fixed non-dhcp IP address,
> 192.168.1.2, then all my communications work as expected. e.g., samba
> file shares in both directions, ip masq access for the win95 system to
> the outside world, printer shares etc... all work. However, with no
> change to the linux box configuration, when I set the win95 system to
> look for a dhcp supplied ip address, all that stops working.
Forgive me, I should have been clearer. To send a DHCP address to a
Windows client you need a static route to 255.255.255.255/32. The route is
not necessary to talk to the client once it has an address, just to get the
DHCPOFFER and DHCPACK packet there. I have no idea why this is necessary
but I have never been able to get a win client to accept an address unless
I add the route I described.
> If I issue a "netstat -nr" command, I get the following:
>
> Kernel IP routing table
> Destination Gateway Genmask Flags MSS Window irtt
> Iface
> 192.168.1.1 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0
> eth0
> 204.146.253.185 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0
> ppp0
> 255.255.255.255 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0
> eth0
> 127.0.0.1 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0
> lo
> 192.168.1.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0
> eth0
> 0.0.0.0 204.146.253.185 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0
> ppp0
You seem to have the route you need (if the clients are on eth0). Check
/var/log/messages and see which messages are being recieved and sent.
Also why does 192.168.1.1 have a netmask of 255.255.255.255? This would
mean the replies to your dhcp clients go out ove the default route via
ppp0 instead of eth0.
--
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
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
