Linux-Networking Digest #166, Volume #11 Sat, 15 May 99 16:13:34 EDT
Contents:
fetchmail, popclient (Allan Adler)
What are good 100baseTX cards for RH 5.2 (Dean and Mary Guenther)
Re: Help me...I've been hacked! (John Oliver)
Lavori via INTERNET + Catalogo per AMICIZIE ("Andrea Paglialunga")
HELP : PPP Server ?? (Eric)
Re: Setting up a Linux-box as a Router (Clifford Kite)
Re: can't locate module ppp-compress-21 (Sean)
Re: What are good 100baseTX cards for RH 5.2 (John Hovell)
Re: fdisk /MBR ??? ("Christopher R. Thompson")
Re: Configuring IPv6 (Konstantinos Agouros)
fetchmail configurations
fetchmail configuration
Re: this is a test (Kevin Martin)
using route (sortof)
Re: Null Modem Connection Linux <> Win95? ("Bono")
Samba and NIS ("squale")
Re: Naive Beowulf Question (Bryan H Kim)
Re: Can't TELNET to Linux ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
New to networking - simple question??? ("Mark Swope")
Re: Setting up a Linux-box as a Router (Friedrich Kirsch)
Re: Sendmail can't start in RH (Malware)
Re: Masquarading X sessions? (Malware)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Allan Adler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: fetchmail, popclient
Date: 15 May 1999 14:16:52 -0400
I'm trying to get my RH 5.1 box to download email from an ISP.
When I use fetchmail, I get the following error message:
gethostbyname failed for localhost.localdomain
Using the -v option doesn't make it any more verbose than that.
Putting a line in /etc/ppp/ip-up.local which tries to use
popclient to do it (modeled on the line in the PPP-HOWTO for
dynamic IP connections) apparently also doesn't work.
The ISP has a POP3 mail server.
Any suggestions?
Allan Adler
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Dean and Mary Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.redhat
Subject: What are good 100baseTX cards for RH 5.2
Date: Sat, 15 May 1999 10:59:02 -0700
I have just installed RH 5.2 on a Micron 486. What is a good choice for
a new 100BaseTX (non-PCI) card for this machine? -- Dean
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Oliver)
Subject: Re: Help me...I've been hacked!
Date: Sat, 15 May 1999 17:55:07 GMT
On 13 May 1999 10:40:19 -0500, Kyler Jones
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>What the hell?
>
>I thought I was pretty secure, I've turned off a lot
>of servcies, no remote root login, shadow passwords, etc..
It might be that sendmail 8.8.7 you're running. Or, if you're running
the bind that came with your Red Hat...
Turn off everything that you don't need. Upgrade to sendmail 8.9.3
and bind 8.1.2 if you *need* them. Otherwise, kill 'em.
------------------------------
From: "Andrea Paglialunga" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.networks.noctools.wanted,comp.os.ms-windows.networking.misc,comp.os.ms-windows.networking.ras,comp.os.ms-windows.networking.tcp-ip
Subject: Lavori via INTERNET + Catalogo per AMICIZIE
Date: Sat, 15 May 1999 11:28:48 +0200
1: Vuoi svolgere lavori a domicilio o tramite Internet per innovativa
attivit� di marketing con discreti guadagni mensili ?
2 :Vuoi fare nuove amicizie ed incontri sul Web e nella tua Citt� ?Inviamo
catalogo contenente annunci con telefoni per incontri in tutta Italia
qualunque siano le sue esigenze : Matrimonio , Amicizia e ........tanto
ancora !!!!!!!!!
Richiedi senza impegno informazioni al nostro indirizzo : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Eric <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: HELP : PPP Server ??
Date: Sun, 16 May 1999 01:39:02 +0800
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hello, Linux experts,
It's my first time to use Linux. I setup a Linux at home.
And I hope my friends can use their PC(ms-windows) to dial into my
Linux.
How can I do this? What should I prepare ?
Since I am a dummy in Linux Networking, would you pleased to teach me
how to
Setup a PPP dialup Server in Linux in detail?
Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Best regards,
Eric
------------------------------
From: kite@NoSpam.%inetport.com (Clifford Kite)
Subject: Re: Setting up a Linux-box as a Router
Date: 15 May 1999 11:50:15 -0500
Friedrich Kirsch ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: Sorry for confusing things. It wasn't ment that way. I didn't want to
make anybody upset ether. The configuration is like this:
: Internet Gateway <--> 192.168.3.0 <--> Gateway <--> 192.168.4.0
: The "Internet Gateway" (192.168.3.101) is configured with IP-Masquerading,
: working fine with the net 192.168.3.101.
That's good since I haven't done IP-Masquerading.
: The "Gateway" has two Interfaces (192.168.3.163 and 192.168.4.129).
: What I want to do: Add network 192.168.4.0 to the existing Configuration,
so that any host in it can talk to 192.168.3.0 and to the Internet also.
Here is routing that I *think* will do what you want, but it comes without
a guarantee - I'm no routing expert either and my lack of IP-Masquerading
experience doesn't help. There's a lot more involved than there appeared
to be in your original post, so be warned that I may be in over my head.
The routing table for each box on this LAN, except the LAN-to-LAN gateway
and the Internet gateway, should look like this:
192.168.3.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0
192.168.4.0 192.168.3.163 255.255.255.0 UG 1 0 0 eth0
default 192.168.3.101 0.0.0.0 UG 1 0 0 eth0
and for each box on the 192.168.4.0 LAN, except the LAN-to-LAN gateway,
it should look like this:
192.168.4.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth1
default 192.168.4.129 0.0.0.0 UG 1 0 0 eth1
The LAN-to-LAN gateway routing should look like this:
192.168.3.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0
192.168.4.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth1
default 192.168.3.101 0.0.0.0 UG 1 0 0 eth0
The Internet gateway should have these routes:
192.168.3.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0
192.168.4.0 192.168.3.163 255.255.255.0 UG 1 0 0 eth0
in addition to the routing to the Internet.
If you can add another card to the box with the Internet gateway for the
192.168.4.0 network then I'd guess you could IP-Masquerade that network
too and that one box would then serve for both gateways. I suggest this
since what I've written above looks rather contorted even if it works.
--
Clifford Kite <kite@inet%port.com> Not a guru. (tm)
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 15 May 1999 11:02:12 -0700
From: Sean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux.slackware
Subject: Re: can't locate module ppp-compress-21
Eriksson wrote:
>
> When I connect to my ISP I get an IP address and everything seems to be OK.
> But I can't do anything. (like ping, ftp, browsing etc) "WTF!" Was my
> thought cause according to /var/log/messages everything SHOULD be ok.
>
> But when I checked "ifconfig" there is no ppp0 interface.
>
> My /etc/resolv.conf should be ok.
>
> Is there anything else I've missed??
>
> Thanx a mill!!
>
> /Martin
First, are you running 'ifconfig' while connected to your ISP? If so,
and you get no ppp0 then your machine isn't setup to recognize domain
names. Try pinging your nameserver by name (name.whoever.net) then try
pinging its numerical address (xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx) If you get a response
using the IP address but not using the domain name, run netconfig to
setup up your network configuration.
Sean
--
The one thing I've learned about freedom of expression,
is that you really ought to keep that sort of thing to yourself.
------------------------------
From: John Hovell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.redhat
Subject: Re: What are good 100baseTX cards for RH 5.2
Date: Sat, 15 May 1999 18:03:00 GMT
Check out
http://cesdis.gsfc.nasa.gov/linux/misc/100mbps.html if you want all the
info in the world. Donald Becker (the owner of the above site) has
written nearly every driver for ethernet cards under linux.
However, for the short answer, obviously the 3Com 3c90x group is really
good, as is the Intell Pro100 whatever -- but they are both really
expensive. Much more economical is something using the AMD tulip
chipsets. I have used several LinkSys EtherFast 10/100 NIC's with the
Tulip chipset (compile DEC Tulip support into the kernel) and they have
worked flawlessly for years. (they're about $40 retail -- less at discount
outlets).
-John
Dean and Mary Guenther wrote:
> I have just installed RH 5.2 on a Micron 486. What is a good choice for
> a new 100BaseTX (non-PCI) card for this machine? -- Dean
------------------------------
From: "Christopher R. Thompson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.protocols.nfs,comp.os.linux.help,alt.linux,alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.questions
Subject: Re: fdisk /MBR ???
Date: Sat, 15 May 1999 09:20:45 -0700
Mikael Wetterstrand wrote:
> Hello
> Well, I just wanna know what the command /mbr does?
> I know u can use it with fdisk to "get ridd of" Lilo , but what does it
> really do?
Hello all, just got a reply from Cameron Spitzer regarding Lilo and
wanted to publicly retract what earlier I said about "Lilo's the worst".
Quote me instead as saying. "Lilo's the best". What I probably really
meant to say was that "Booting from Floppys is the worst".
I don't know what got into me. My mind must have been suffering from NFS
fever or something at the time.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Konstantinos Agouros)
Subject: Re: Configuring IPv6
Date: Sat, 15 May 1999 09:44:56 GMT
Morten Lund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>Hi,
>I am running a RedHat 6.0 distribution on which I am trying to setup
>IPv6. I have copiled a new kernel and downloaded new IPv6 copatible
>software such as ping, traceroute, finger and so on. However I cannot
>find a guide that tells how to configure my IPv6 mashine, if somebody
>can help me I would be very grateful.
Try www.bieringer.de, it's quite resourceful.
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: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: fetchmail configurations
Date: 15 May 1999 18:30:55 GMT
I am wondering how to set the .fetchmailrc file to have multiple users.
Also can fetchmail do pop3 although the user doesn't have an account on the
box just a mail folder? Any help would be appreciated, maybe a sample
.fetchmailrc file so I can take a look.
================== Posted via SearchLinux ==================
http://www.searchlinux.com
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: fetchmail configuration
Date: 15 May 1999 18:30:55 GMT
I am wondering if anyone has a sample .fetchmailrc file I can look at.
Also if anyone knows a way to make pop3 accounts without having to
"adduser" the person. Any help would be appreciated.
================== Posted via SearchLinux ==================
http://www.searchlinux.com
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kevin Martin)
Subject: Re: this is a test
Date: Sat, 15 May 1999 18:32:20 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, it says "L'Hopital"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
This is a flame. You are an inconsiderate twit for posting a test outside
the test groups (e.g. alt.test). Go away.
------------------------------
From: sortof <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: linux.redhat.misc
Subject: using route
Date: Sat, 15 May 1999 11:31:30 +0100
i have my two nics installed and working and i was able to make it
connect to the other computer in my lan and seemed to be working fine,
but then when i tried to get out on the internet it wouldnt work any
more. apparently it is trying to connect through my lan, and that just
wont work. someone said something about using route to fix it, so i
looked at it and i dont know what to do with it.. could someone help me
figure out how to use it?
------------------------------
From: "Bono" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Null Modem Connection Linux <> Win95?
Date: Sun, 16 May 1999 03:41:02 +0900
Those guys are suggesting you other options ;)
Well, I'm doing exactly what you're trying to do and I like it.
Because, my win95 box is a notebook, the ethernet card for which is still
expensive. Plus, It gives me a 115200 speed connection which is quite
reasonable for using internet with just 2 dollars cable.
However, you can't connect a Linux box with win95 direct cable connection.
It means that you should use DUN(Dialup Networking) and it's much faster.
Visit here:
http://www.linuxgazette.com/issue41/smyth.html
!!Remember that you should make sure you have a RIGHT cable!!
If this site doesn't help you, mail me.
I'm doing exactly what you're trying to do.
Good Luck!
Bono
Alex Manuk ��(��) �������� �ۼ��Ͽ����ϴ�...
>Hi all... Trying DESPERATELY to interconnect two machines.. RH Linux to
>Win95 over a null
>modem cable. The two machines are capable of talking over Win95's "direct
>cable connection",
>but when I try to set up pppd on the Linux box, it won't talk to the Win
>machine. Using the proper
>null modem serial cable, Com1 (ttys0) to Com1. Is there additional
software
>that's required on
>either box to make this work? The eventual goal is to "modem-share"
between
>the two boxes, so
>pppd is kind of necessary, but I have no clue what authentication procedure
>Win95's direct
>cable connection follows, so I don't know what to send to the serial port
>during the connection
>process.
>
>Another option (I think) is to use Win95's "dial up networking" to
establish
>the connection, and use
>the Linux box as a server, but I'm pretty lost as to how to acheive even
>THAT goal. Any assistance
>would be greatly appreciated.
>
>Alex
>WD8JMM
>
>
>
>**** Posted from RemarQ - http://www.remarq.com - Discussions Start Here
(tm) ****
------------------------------
From: "squale" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Samba and NIS
Date: Sat, 15 May 1999 20:31:57 +0200
Has anybody tried to coordinate Samba Passwords and a NIS (or NIS+) server ?
I've heard it is possible but I experience problems with how to do this. If
anybody has a suggestion or has ever tried this, please send any
information.
Thanks for any reply
Squale
------------------------------
From: Bryan H Kim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: Re: Naive Beowulf Question
Date: Sat, 15 May 1999 13:59:22 -0500
News wrote:
>
> Is it possible to run Beowulf on several (three or four) somewhat
> dissimilar computers? I have several old computers (486 class)
> that are *close* but not exactly the same.
>
> Obviously, if it works, the bottleneck will be at the slowest
> computer.
>
> Is there anyone out there doing something similar with success?
>
> Thanks,
> Mark Swope
Absolutely! I am writing this message from our mini beowulf cluster made
up from 4 450 MHz PII box and 2 333 MHz PII dual CPU boxes. So I have
five CPUs, one of 450 and 4 of 333. There is nothing tricky about
getting the computers to run together if that package you want to run
will support it.
If you want to run a MPMD parallel program, than having one fast master
node is actually advantageous. I run quantum mechanical calculations
with GAMESS, which is a SPMD package with dynamic load balancing, so the
package takes care of the different processor speeds.
At home I run a cluster of 2*333 MHz PII, 2*180 PPro, and 1*233 Pentium
MMX, again with no problems. I get high CPU utilization on all nodes
(95%+) and a compute job that would take a high end Silicon graphics
workstation a week gets done in five days or so.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Can't TELNET to Linux
Date: Sat, 15 May 1999 18:37:07 GMT
I had the same problem. First check out your /etc/hosts.allow and
/etc/hosts.deny . I'm not sure what order there checked in. There you
can specify by the IP number, which hosts you will grant access to.
After that though you'll probably experience the problem of Telnet and
FTP taking extremly long to connect. To fix that problem i ran netconf
and removed the Nameserver entry, and the Gateway Entry. That should
get everything going smooth. I hope this is helpful. Let us know how
you make out.
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (K Berrien) wrote:
> I'm having trouble telnetting to my Linux box. When I connect to
> Linux I only get so far....
>
> Red Hat Linux release 5.2 (Apollo)
> Kernel 2.0.36 on an i486
>
> And then it hangs. I have one other user account created at this
> time, other than root.
>
> Help, TIA.
>
--== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==--
---Share what you know. Learn what you don't.---
------------------------------
From: "Mark Swope" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: New to networking - simple question???
Date: Fri, 14 May 1999 19:16:08 -0500
I have some sort of mental block about networking....
I have a Linux server set up at home. I've gotten ISC's
dhcpd running on it for my other two computers (a desktop
and a laptop). I have Samba setup as a WINS server as
well...
What's screwing me up is that I tried to do something from
my server to one of the other two computers and I couldn't do
it because the server was looking at my hosts file which has
an older static mapping that I used to use.
What do I modify to tell the server to look at what dhcp daemon
has assigned for addresses?
Thanks,
mas
------------------------------
From: Friedrich Kirsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Setting up a Linux-box as a Router
Date: Sat, 15 May 1999 22:24:25 +0100
Dear Clifford,
what to say, things are working now !!! The simple thing I didn't realize all
the time was, that sending a ping to a machine needs a route back to were it
came from. So the only thing, that was missing, was a route on the hosts of the
.3-net back to the .4-net. Thanks a lot for that one!
> If you can add another card to the box with the Internet gateway for the
> 192.168.4.0 network then I'd guess you could IP-Masquerade that network
> too and that one box would then serve for both gateways. I suggest this
> since what I've written above looks rather contorted even if it works.
I wanted to keep the .4-net (where people are testing an fooling around) a bit
away from the .3-net (office, secretaries,...). But actually it makes no
difference if I just put another NIC into the Internet-Gateway. I think about
it.
If you could see the sudden clarity arising on my forehead right now...
Thanks a lot again
from Munich (Germany)
Friedrich
Clifford Kite schrieb:
> Friedrich Kirsch ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
> : Sorry for confusing things. It wasn't ment that way. I didn't want to
> make anybody upset ether. The configuration is like this:
>
> : Internet Gateway <--> 192.168.3.0 <--> Gateway <--> 192.168.4.0
>
> : The "Internet Gateway" (192.168.3.101) is configured with IP-Masquerading,
> : working fine with the net 192.168.3.101.
>
> That's good since I haven't done IP-Masquerading.
>
> : The "Gateway" has two Interfaces (192.168.3.163 and 192.168.4.129).
>
> : What I want to do: Add network 192.168.4.0 to the existing Configuration,
> so that any host in it can talk to 192.168.3.0 and to the Internet also.
>
> Here is routing that I *think* will do what you want, but it comes without
> a guarantee - I'm no routing expert either and my lack of IP-Masquerading
> experience doesn't help. There's a lot more involved than there appeared
> to be in your original post, so be warned that I may be in over my head.
>
> The routing table for each box on this LAN, except the LAN-to-LAN gateway
> and the Internet gateway, should look like this:
>
> 192.168.3.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0
> 192.168.4.0 192.168.3.163 255.255.255.0 UG 1 0 0 eth0
> default 192.168.3.101 0.0.0.0 UG 1 0 0 eth0
>
> and for each box on the 192.168.4.0 LAN, except the LAN-to-LAN gateway,
> it should look like this:
>
> 192.168.4.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth1
> default 192.168.4.129 0.0.0.0 UG 1 0 0 eth1
>
> The LAN-to-LAN gateway routing should look like this:
>
> 192.168.3.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0
> 192.168.4.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth1
> default 192.168.3.101 0.0.0.0 UG 1 0 0 eth0
>
> The Internet gateway should have these routes:
>
> 192.168.3.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0
> 192.168.4.0 192.168.3.163 255.255.255.0 UG 1 0 0 eth0
>
> in addition to the routing to the Internet.
>
> If you can add another card to the box with the Internet gateway for the
> 192.168.4.0 network then I'd guess you could IP-Masquerade that network
> too and that one box would then serve for both gateways. I suggest this
> since what I've written above looks rather contorted even if it works.
>
> --
> Clifford Kite <kite@inet%port.com> Not a guru. (tm)
------------------------------
From: Malware <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Sendmail can't start in RH
Date: Sat, 15 May 1999 20:24:53 +0200
Hi Kelvin,
you wrote:
> I found that the sendmail stop after a while when the system start, when
> I look at the log in /var/log/maillog, it shows:
>
> ==============================================================
> May 15 09:21:45 CX346166-A sendmail[668]: problem creating SMTP socket
> May 15 09:21:50 CX346166-A sendmail[668]: NOQUEUE: SYSERR(root):
> opendaemonsocket: cannot bind: Address already in use
[...]
> and here is my /etc/inetd.conf
[...]
> smtp stream tcp nowait root /usr/bin/smtpd smtpd
Comment out above line. Else inetd does listen on port 25 (smtp) and
does try to start smtpd when a connection is established.
Malware
------------------------------
From: Malware <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Masquarading X sessions?
Date: Sat, 15 May 1999 19:56:15 +0200
Hi Yuan,
you wrote:
> I use a masquarading Linux at my Internet connection. How can I get X
> servers behind the firewall to receive display? I tried setting
> $DISPLAY to the firewall, it won't work. Set it to any internal names
> (or IPs, I use private IPs), the client couldn't recognize it.
Use redir or ipautofw to redirect ports from the firewall to port 6000
of the clients. By forwarding port 6001 to client1, 6002 to client2 and
so on, you can things get displayed things at clientX by setting the
display to "firewall:X".
Malware
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
