Linux-Networking Digest #170, Volume #11 Sun, 16 May 99 00:13:39 EDT
Contents:
Re: using route ("Curt")
kppp : connecting... and then timeout ! ("marc*")
Re: can't ping, ftp etc "Unable to connect, unknown host" (hazzmat)
Re: ppp: Protocol-Reject for unsupported protocol? (Clifford Kite)
Re: Apache on Large Corporate Network (Stephen Carville)
Re: Forwarding with multiple ethernet cards (Joe Kellner)
Re: using route ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: diald ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
sorting mail (Jay Copeland)
Re: Forwarding with multiple ethernet cards (Mircea)
routing issues, ppp0, eth0, vmnet1, smb (Josh Miller)
Re: Long delay starting sendmail ("Ashley Cambrell")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reply-To: "Curt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "Curt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: linux.redhat.misc
Subject: Re: using route
Date: Sat, 15 May 1999 20:19:53 -0500
post the results of 'ifconfig' and 'netstat -nr'
sortof <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> 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: "marc*" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: kppp : connecting... and then timeout !
Date: Sun, 16 May 1999 03:25:01 +0200
hi,
i've been setting an isdn gazel connection using kppp, very cool bec doesn't
need all those config files. everything seems ok, when i launch a
connection, it reads:
modem ready > dialing XXXXX > Connecting....
.....and keeps trying to connect unsuccessfully.
and then finally times out.
anybody has a guess ?
tks
marc.
------------------------------
From: hazzmat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.slakware
Subject: Re: can't ping, ftp etc "Unable to connect, unknown host"
Date: Sat, 15 May 1999 12:38:34 -0400
Sorry. Way out of my depth. Using Netstat and ifconfig, you should be able to
tell where those packets are going. If it's not an erroneous routing address,
then it's a hardware thing, or cosmic rays or gypsies...
Anybody gonna give this guy some real help?
Eriksson wrote:
> No.. That wasn't my problem. I'm using Slackware 3.6 and kernel 2.2.4 btw.
>
> Any other ideas?
>
> /Martin
>
> >Hi,
> >Beware advice from the very-newbie (like me)....
> > Do you have a ethernet card? And if so, do you remember the point
> in
> >your installation when you set it up --there's a line in the setup screen,
> the
> >third i believe, that reads "default gateway". The redhat install program
> will
> >automatically put a 'reasonable' number in here for you if you simply enter
> a
> >IP for your nic on the first field. Unfortunately, this will screw-up your
> PPP
> >connection to Internet , if you make that connection directly from your
> Linux
> >box without going through a gateway host on your LAN. You would
> deliberately
> >have to zero out this field during initial setup to avoid having unusable
> PPP.
> >
> > If I have guessed your problem correctly, in the output of the route
> >command you will see some # like 192.168.1..254 flagged with the UG
> 'gateway'
> >tag in the output--but PPP.is also flagged as UG! This means that your box
> >dials up and authenticates itself to the ISP but all your TCP requests and
> >such are mis-routed to the eth interface. Study the man page for route to
> >figure out how to delete this spurious gateway. Or reinstall and be sure to
> >avoid having the eth0 interface become a gateway device. Ask someone for
> help
> >with route, it's a complicated pain in the neck to use correctly.
> >
> >I don't really know what I am doing --your situation sounds exactly like
> one I
> >had, though.
------------------------------
From: kite@NoSpam.%inetport.com (Clifford Kite)
Subject: Re: ppp: Protocol-Reject for unsupported protocol?
Date: 15 May 1999 08:40:24 -0500
Carsten G Brautigam ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: After upgrading to RedHat 6.0, I have problms with PPP.
Here's an update: ppp-2.3.8 is just out with fixes and enhancements.
It *may* help with problems involving unwanted bytes that appear in the
serial port data stream.
: The lgo file says:
: May 13 22:48:26 unicorn pppd[6890]: Protocol-Reject for unsupported
: protocol 0x5072
--
Clifford Kite <kite@inet%port.com> Not a guru. (tm)
/* Better is the enemy of good enough. */
------------------------------
From: Stephen Carville <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Apache on Large Corporate Network
Date: Sat, 15 May 1999 20:09:44 -0700
Chris Knapp wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I recently installed redhat 5.2 on an older Pentium Pro at work. The install
> went flawlessly, I selected DHCP as the networking protocol, and when I
> rebooted, the machine logged me in as root on the PDC.
>
> Questions: I want to use this machine as a temporary webserver on a
> 300-node NT network- how do I get Apache to work? A lot of the HowTo's
> explain how to use a Linux machine as the sole server, but we have fully
> functioning network and simply want to add a web-server. Can someone point
> me to info on how to do this or give me some general tips?
Unfortunately a lot of companies that use dhcp do not do dynamic DNS as
well (WINS makes this possible on NT95 networks). Do an nslookup on your
current address and see if your name in DNS is the real machine name or
something vanilla. If it vanilla, ask your network admins for a fixed IP
and an entry in DNS. Otherwise, you can still run Apache but no one will
be able to find you on the network.
--
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: Joe Kellner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Forwarding with multiple ethernet cards
Date: Sun, 16 May 1999 01:36:48 GMT
ipchains -P forward DENY
ipchains -A forward -s 192.168.17.0/24 -j MASQ
Christian Armeanu wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I have 2 network cards installed in my linux box. She's meant to act as
> a server for 2 windoze PCs. My actual problem is the configuration with
> ipchains. Until now I couldn't manage to have the windows PCs see each
> other, but each of them is able to get to the server (Samba), so
> networking is working.
> ------------------------
>
> The config is:
>
> (route.conf)
> 192.168.17.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 eth0 ( IP: 192.168.17.1 ),
> connected PC = 192.168.17.100
> 192.168.18.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 eth1 ( IP: 192.168.18.1 ),
> connected PC = 192.168.18.100
>
> ipchains -A forward -i eth0 -p tcp -s 192.168.18.0/24 -d 192.168.17.0/24
> -j ACCEPT -b
> ipchains -A forward -i eth1 -p tcp -s 192.168.17.0/24 -d 192.168.18.0/24
> -j ACCEPT -b
>
> ------------
>
> :-( IT DOES NOT WORK !!!
>
> Any help will be highly appreciated,
> Chris
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: linux.redhat.misc
Subject: Re: using route
Date: 16 May 1999 04:31:44 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
sortof scribbled manically:
: 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?
Kind of hard to tell without seeing the problem, but it could be
a routing problem. Basically, your routing should be such that things for
the local network go out over the NIC connected to your LAN, and everything
else goes out over your connection to the internet, whether that's another
NIC, a ppp connection, or whatever. For example, on my system, which has
a setup that's similar to what you're describing, it looks like this:
alderamin:~>/sbin/route
Kernel IP routing table
Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface
ts7.phx.inficad * 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 1 ppp0
localnet * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 15 eth0
loopback * 255.0.0.0 U 0 0 31 lo
default ts7.phx.inficad 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 114 ppp0
Notice how 'localnet' destinations go through eth0, but the default
is to go through ppp0. How exactly are you trying to connect to outside
machines, and exactly what is the error message you're getting?
JD
--
"Corporations can't teach hacking. It has to be in you."
--Emmanuel Goldstein
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux.slackware
Subject: Re: diald
Date: Sun, 16 May 1999 01:51:58 GMT
Alrighty. I am in a somewhat similar situation. So far I have been
cookbooking along ala 'The Linux Network', which comes w/ Slackware 3.5
. I am using Slackware 4.0 beta 3, so fwiw I have kernel 2.2.6,
pppd-2.3.7, and diald-0.16.5. I set up the /etc/ppp/ppp-on and
ppp-on-dialer as shown below. I can connect w/ the 'net beautifully
(well, except for pppd griping about the lack of ppp-compress-24/26
modules, but I can fix that); in fact that is the connection that I am
using to write this message. The problem(s) come from/with diald.
/etc/ppp/ppp-on (copied to /usr/sbin/ppp-on, chmod 700)
#!/bin/sh
#
MYNAME=myname
ISPNAME=*
DIALER_SCRIPT=/etc/ppp/ppp-on-dialer
#
exec /usr/sbin/pppd name ${MYNAME} lock modem crtscts\
/dev/ttyS2 115200 noipdefault defaultroute connect $DIALER_SCRIPT
/etc/ppp/ppp-on-dialer (chmod 700)
#!/bin/sh
#
TELEPHONE=6300883
DIALSCRIPT=/tmp/dialscript.$$
trap "rm -f ${DIALSCRIPT}" exit INT HUP QUIT
umask 066
cat <<EOF > ${DIALSCRIPT}
TIMEOUT 45
ABORT '\nBUSY\r'
ABORT '\nNO CARRIER\r'
ABORT '\nNO ANSWER\r'
'' '\nAT\r'
OK ATDT$TELEPHONE
CONNECT ''
EOF
/usr/sbin/chat -v -f ${DIALSCRIPT}
My /etc/diald.conf is pretty bare-bones, i.e. just what was in the book
/etc/diald.conf
mode ppp
connect /etc/ppp/ppp-on-dialer
device /dev/ttyS2
speed 115200
modem
lock
crtscts
pppd-options name myname
local 192.168.1.1
remote 192.168.1.254
dynamic
defaultroute
include /usr/lib/diald/standard.filter
Unfortunately, a simple
ping www.navix.net gets me the following in /var/log/messages:
May 15 18:37:21 shaitan kernel: diald uses obsolete
(PF_INET,SOCK_PACKET)
WTF is this?
May 15 18:42:15 shaitan diald[143]: Running connect (pid = 185).
May 15 18:42:15 shaitan chat[187]: timeout set to 45 seconds
May 15 18:42:15 shaitan chat[187]: abort on (\nBUSY\r)
May 15 18:42:15 shaitan chat[187]: abort on (\nNO CARRIER\r)
May 15 18:42:15 shaitan chat[187]: abort on (\nNO ANSWER\r)
May 15 18:42:15 shaitan chat[187]: send (^JAT^M^M)
May 15 18:42:15 shaitan chat[187]: expect (OK)
May 15 18:42:15 shaitan chat[187]: trap: exit: not a signal
specification
May 15 18:42:15 shaitan chat[187]:
May 15 18:42:15 shaitan chat[187]: AT^M^M
May 15 18:42:15 shaitan chat[187]: 5601^M
May 15 18:42:15 shaitan chat[187]: ^M
May 15 18:42:15 shaitan chat[187]: ERROR^M
May 15 18:43:00 shaitan chat[187]: alarm
May 15 18:43:00 shaitan diald[143]: Connect script failed.
May 15 18:43:00 shaitan chat[187]: Failed
May 15 18:43:01 shaitan diald[143]: Delaying 30 seconds before clear to
dial.
May 15 18:51:16 shaitan diald[143]: SIGTERM. Termination request
received.
i.e. I killed it
May 15 18:51:16 shaitan diald[143]: Diald is dieing with code 0
>snip
Here is the end of the log, showing a (relatively) successful manual
connection:
May 15 19:18:08 shaitan kernel: registered device ppp0
May 15 19:18:08 shaitan pppd[399]: pppd 2.3.7 started by root, uid 0
May 15 19:18:09 shaitan chat[402]: timeout set to 45 seconds
May 15 19:18:09 shaitan chat[402]: abort on (\nBUSY\r)
May 15 19:18:09 shaitan chat[402]: abort on (\nNO CARRIER\r)
May 15 19:18:09 shaitan chat[402]: abort on (\nNO ANSWER\r)
May 15 19:18:09 shaitan chat[402]: send (^JAT^M^M)
May 15 19:18:10 shaitan chat[402]: expect (OK)
May 15 19:18:10 shaitan chat[402]:
May 15 19:18:10 shaitan chat[402]: AT^M^M^M
May 15 19:18:10 shaitan chat[402]: OK
May 15 19:18:10 shaitan chat[402]: -- got it
May 15 19:18:10 shaitan chat[402]: send (ATDT6300883^M)
May 15 19:18:10 shaitan chat[402]: expect (CONNECT)
May 15 19:18:10 shaitan chat[402]: ^M
May 15 19:18:34 shaitan chat[402]: ATDT6300883^M^M
May 15 19:18:34 shaitan chat[402]: CONNECT
May 15 19:18:34 shaitan chat[402]: -- got it
May 15 19:18:34 shaitan chat[402]: send (^M)
May 15 19:18:34 shaitan pppd[399]: Serial connection established.
May 15 19:18:34 shaitan pppd[399]: Using interface ppp0
May 15 19:18:34 shaitan pppd[399]: Connect: ppp0 <--> /dev/ttyS2
May 15 19:18:43 shaitan pppd[399]: Remote message: M-\M-/_
May 15 19:18:43 shaitan modprobe: can't locate module ppp-compress-26
May 15 19:18:43 shaitan modprobe: can't locate module ppp-compress-24
May 15 19:18:43 shaitan modprobe: can't locate module ppp-compress-26
May 15 19:18:43 shaitan modprobe: can't locate module ppp-compress-24
May 15 19:18:43 shaitan pppd[399]: local IP address 206.158.252.162
May 15 19:18:43 shaitan pppd[399]: remote IP address 206.158.252.129
Can anyone help me here. I am not sure what to do. The diald-faq and
the man pages don't seem to address problems this early on (to my
eyes). I am confused since the ppp scripts work fine manually; but then
again, they never peeped about a typo of umask as umash until I ran
diald.
Monte Milanuk
--== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==--
---Share what you know. Learn what you don't.---
------------------------------
From: Jay Copeland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: sorting mail
Date: Sat, 15 May 1999 23:13:15 +0000
i've got fetchmail and it works great. i've also got procmail but
haven't been able to figure it out.
we've got 4 users sharing an account: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
i've been through all the docs, but haven't found how you can sort in
this fashion.
user1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --> /home/user1/Mail
user2 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --> /home/user2/Mail
etc...
any ideas?
thanks in advance.
jay
--
__
/ / __ __ __ __ ____ __
/ /__ / // \/ // // /\ \/ /
/_____//_//_/\__/ \_,_/ /_/\_\
Don't fear the Penguin.
Protect privacy, boycott Intel: http://www.bigbrotherinside.org
------------------------------
From: Mircea <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Forwarding with multiple ethernet cards
Date: Sat, 15 May 1999 23:16:59 -0400
Yes, and don't forget:
echo "1" > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward
MST
Joe Kellner wrote:
>
> ipchains -P forward DENY
> ipchains -A forward -s 192.168.17.0/24 -j MASQ
>
> Christian Armeanu wrote:
> >
> >
------------------------------
From: Josh Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: routing issues, ppp0, eth0, vmnet1, smb
Date: Sun, 16 May 1999 00:00:10 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi,
I had my system working great with eth0 going out to a 192.168.0.1/24 network, and
ppp0 hitting the
rest of the world. Now, somethings messed up.
I've got bind, sendmail, smb/samba, ftp, http, and vmware's vmnet stuff all on here.
name lookups
still work great. ping's weren't working but I got them working again. Now I'm not
sure what's
trying to go where.
ping'ing any client on any interface is working fine.
traceroute, on the other hand, gives the following message:
traceroute: Warning: Multiple interfaces found; using 192.168.0.1 @ eth0
traceroute to www.sony.com (209.0.216.83), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets
then time's out. I want it to use ppp0 by default, as I do everything except requests
for 192.168
network.
netstat -nr yeilds:
Kernel IP routing table
Destination Gateway Genmask Flags MSS Window irtt Iface
206.183.228.10 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0 ppp0
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 vmnet1
192.168.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0
0.0.0.0 206.183.228.10 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 ppp0
ifconfig yeilds:
eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:60:97:36:D2:7D
inet addr:192.168.0.1 Bcast:192.168.0.255 Mask:255.255.255.0
UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
RX packets:4607 errors:6 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:11
TX packets:3590 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
collisions:0 txqueuelen:100
Interrupt:10 Base address:0xf700
lo Link encap:Local Loopback
inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0
UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:3924 Metric:1
RX packets:1233 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:1233 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
collisions:0 txqueuelen:0
ppp0 Link encap:Point-to-Point Protocol
inet addr:206.183.229.240 P-t-P:206.183.228.10 Mask:255.255.255.255
UP POINTOPOINT RUNNING NOARP MULTICAST MTU:1524 Metric:1
RX packets:3426 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:3680 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
collisions:0 txqueuelen:10
vmnet1 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:50:56:8A:00:00
inet addr:192.168.1.1 Bcast:192.168.1.255 Mask:255.255.255.0
UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
RX packets:2248 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:1925 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
collisions:0 txqueuelen:100
Can anyone explain to me why traceroute wants to go over the 192.168.0.1 interface?
(eth0)
By the way, if I take down vmware, thing seem to work again. Also, I had to take down
samba and
bring it back up to get ping/http/etc access working normally again (I don't know what
it had to do
with anything though).
One more question... what do you enter to modify a route?
like, could I change the netmask on eth0 and vmnet1 to point to be 192.168.0.0? or
192.168.255.0?
Hopefully, I'm not sounding like a complete idiot. Thanks in advance for any help.
Josh I.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Ashley Cambrell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Long delay starting sendmail
Date: Sun, 16 May 1999 13:24:00 +1000
Hi Hugh
I believe this is because it is trying to send requests to a DNS. Do you
have a DNS setup on the linux computer for the internal network?
Sendmail unless specified will look up it's own domain and host name and
that of the machines that are sending mail. Setting up a DNS will stop this
process timeing out (hence the wait as it looks up is name from a large list
of DNS's)
Another possible solution is to turn of sendmail DNS usage in linuxconf
(it's one of the options there)
That should fix the problem
Ashley Cambrell
Hugh Fader wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>I am having a problem where sendmail takes a very long time to
>start. 2-3 minutes. I am running Redhat 6.0 and also had this
>problem when running 5.2. Once started, sendmail runs fine. It is
>just bothersome that it takes so long to reboot. I am running on
>@Home network with a static IP.
>
>Can anybody give me a pointer toward fixing this problem?
>
>Thanks in advance.
>
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
