Linux-Networking Digest #281, Volume #11 Tue, 25 May 99 17:14:07 EDT
Contents:
Ethernet wiring problem (Kari Suomela)
Re: Linksys ethernet cards (Neil Zanella)
tcp vs. X.25 ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Can't see Samba Server from Win95 (Mike Dion)
Re: Wireless Bridge (Neil Zanella)
Re: TCP Very Slow w/kernel 2.2.7 (Joe Flasch)
Re: Redhat 6.0, IP Masq, and Samba HELP!!!!!! (Ronald Cole)
Samba passwords - I need help! (Mike Dion)
remote-lp (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Bj=F6rn?= Gerhart)
Re: IP Masquerade/Routing ("Curt")
Re: How to get samba&win98 talking ("Terence Parker")
Re: Anybody using DSL? (bryan)
Re: Can TELNET to Linux box, but then... (XonXoff)
Re: Linux Redhat 6.0 and rogers@home ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Solaris 7 as NFS Server for Linux (Casper H.S. Dik - Network Security Engineer)
Re: tcpdump: Socket type not supported ("F.P. Groeneveld")
Re: Samba 1.9c & Windows NT WS 4.0 SP4 AND MS Data Access Pac 2.0 ("Steve Day")
What am I forgetting with PPP? (root)
AX88140AQ ? driver ? ethernetcard ? (ulli)
Re: Dual T1's? (Matt Starnes)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kari Suomela)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kari Suomela)
Subject: Ethernet wiring problem
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 18:55:18 GMT
Monday May 24 1999 11:47, James in SC wrote to All:
JS> currently runs straight from the hub to each PC with no problem.
JS> When
JS> I tried to wire up a wall jack straight to the hub (no patch panel)
JS>
JS> and then run a patch cord from the wall to the PC it didn't work.
JS> I
Check your cables!
KS
... The bold print giveth and the fine print taketh away.
------------------------------
From: Neil Zanella <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linksys ethernet cards
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 15:57:37 -0230
The Linksys company used to have a Linux page.
Kernel 2.0.36 works fine with my PCMCIA 10\100 ethernet card as
well as my PC Etherfast 10\100 card. Use the pcmcia-cs package
for pcmcia and use the tulip driver for a PC.
Best Regards,
Neil
On Mon, 17 May 1999, root wrote:
> Does anyone know if there is a driver for a linksys card available? I
> have not gotten a response from the company. I want to know before i try
> to make it emulate an NE2000.
>
> thanks
>
> ross
>
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: tcp vs. X.25
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 18:20:17 GMT
Hi,
What is the difference between IP and X.25?.
What is the meaning or purpose of each?.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==--
---Share what you know. Learn what you don't.---
------------------------------
From: Mike Dion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Can't see Samba Server from Win95
Date: 25 May 1999 15:31:14 GMT
My Samba Server and WIN 95 computer are on separate network segments and I
would like to share my Samba Server's filesystem with the Win95 computer.
To date all of my attempts to configure Samba have failed and I have yet to
see any Samba services from my Win95 computer! The DOS command "net view
\\computername" fails with an error 51 and message that the remote
computer is not accepting or responding to requests.
Background:
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
- Win95 computer on LAN with Windows NT Server "TIMNT" as primary
Domain Controller and Master Browser; Domain is domain
- PC can reach the Linux box by ping, traceroute, ftp, etc.
- Samba Server (Linux) is on a separate network segment direct connected
to the segment on which the Win95 PC resides
- Samba server resides n the DMZ, between a Cisco router and
firewall computer
- Red Hat Linux V5.2 and have installed samba-1.9.18
- testparm against smb.conf replies "Loaded services file OK"
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I'm stumped -- is the firewall the problem? It has never been a problem in
the past. The firewall has always permitted traffic to flow thru providing
that requests were initiated from the inside?
Your help in this matter would be greatly appreciated!
Sincerely,
Mike D.
Halifax, NS Canada
================== Posted via SearchLinux ==================
http://www.searchlinux.com
------------------------------
From: Neil Zanella <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Wireless Bridge
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 16:08:02 -0230
I don t know if this is relevant but I have set up a laptop
to connect via 100BaseT ethernet to a PC. Once I telnet to the PC
from the laptop I can dial out through the PC s modem. Hence I can
telnet from the laptop to the PC to a Unix box on the internet.
This is accomplished by giving both the PC and the laptop some fake
IPs. I think what you might need is a separate IP for each interface.
By the way, how does WaveLAN work with Linux and what drivers does it
use.. Does the WaveLAN device attach to a PCMCIA slot. Are WaveLAN
devices for laptops different than their desktop counterparts.
Further, is it possible to make a network of 4 computers, each
located 300 kilometers apart and equipped with onw WaveLAN device,
hence spanning 1,200km..
Thanks for your feedback,
Neil Zanella
nzanella at cs.mun.ca
(sorry for the punctuation: this keyboard is not working properly)
On Thu, 20 May 1999, Donald R. McGregor wrote:
>
> A student dumped the following problem on my desk:
>
> There's a libereto hand-held running linux with a WaveLAN wireless
> adaptor, and a linux box with another wireless adaptor and a
> standard ethernet card connected to the world.
>
> +----------+ +----+ +-------+
> |Libereto |-------------| PC |-------|Da Net |
> +----------+ +----+ +-------+
>
> The PC and the Libereto communicate via the wavelan card
> in each. The PC is dual-homed with both a wireless and
> standard PCMCIA ethernet card. All the machines have IP
> numbers on the same network, x.x.7.x.
>
> The Libereto and the PC can ping back and forth, but of
> course the Libereto can't get to anything beyond the
> wireless interface on the PC. The ARP lookups will fail,
> since those won't go across the PC, and stuff from the
> net won't get to the Libereto, for the same reason.
>
> It seems to me that what's needed is a bridge, so that
> the ethernet frames can get across the PC.
>
> Before I get too deeply into this, I'm wondering if anyone
> has done something like this before, and knows of any
> gotchas. (For example I'd like to keep IP numbers on the PC, so
> that it can still be used for useful things, and the
> how-to on linux bridging suggests keeping IPs off the interfaces.)
>
> --
> Don McGregor | "It's deja-vu and amnesia at the same time--
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] | I've forgotten this before."
>
>
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 14:03:53 -0500
From: Joe Flasch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: TCP Very Slow w/kernel 2.2.7
Steven Ihde wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm running kernel 2.2.7 and have been seeing a very strange
> phenomonon. I'm connected to IBM's intranet via an ISDN line. This
> should give me about 8kB/s, or 16kB/s if it brings up both B-channels.
> When I ftp to a number of different systems inside, I get just about
> exactly that. But on certain systems, I get terrible performance,
> around 1.5kB/s. I was wondering what could be wrong, so I did a little
> tracing with tcpdump. I found that my box doesn't appear to be sending
> TCP ACKs correctly.
>
> Here's a short sample from a working (fast) ftp:
>
> 15:17:36.763571 EXPLORE3.ALMADEN.IBM.COM.3453 > ihdehome..3649: .
> 2049:2561(512) ack 1 win 16384
> 15:17:36.771015 EXPLORE3.ALMADEN.IBM.COM.3453 > ihdehome..3649: .
> 2561:3073(512) ack 1 win 16384
> 15:17:36.771085 ihdehome..3649 > EXPLORE3.ALMADEN.IBM.COM.3453: . ack
> 3073 win 32256 (DF) [tos 0x8]
> 15:17:36.837844 EXPLORE3.ALMADEN.IBM.COM.3453 > ihdehome..3649: .
> 3073:3585(512) ack 1 win 16384
> 15:17:36.845451 EXPLORE3.ALMADEN.IBM.COM.3453 > ihdehome..3649: .
> 3585:4097(512) ack 1 win 16384
> 15:17:36.845515 ihdehome..3649 > EXPLORE3.ALMADEN.IBM.COM.3453: . ack
> 4097 win 32256 (DF) [tos 0x8]
> 15:17:36.912280 EXPLORE3.ALMADEN.IBM.COM.3453 > ihdehome..3649: .
> 4097:4609(512) ack 1 win 16384
> 15:17:36.919784 EXPLORE3.ALMADEN.IBM.COM.3453 > ihdehome..3649: .
> 4609:5121(512) ack 1 win 16384
> 15:17:36.919848 ihdehome..3649 > EXPLORE3.ALMADEN.IBM.COM.3453: . ack
> 5121 win 32256 (DF) [tos 0x8]
>
> Note especially the third, sixth, and ninth lines, where my box
> (ihdehome) ACKs everything up to and including the last byte received.
> Now here's a sample from a slow (apparently broken) ftp:
>
> 23:11:04.256561 socks2.almaden.ibm.com.1080 > ihdehome..3005: .
> 18824:20272(1448) ack 1 win 15928 <nop,nop,timestamp 931434408
> 133834089>
> 23:11:04.440755 socks2.almaden.ibm.com.1080 > ihdehome..3005: .
> 20272:21720(1448) ack 1 win 15928 <nop,nop,timestamp 931434189
> 133822936>
> 23:11:04.755789 ihdehome..3005 > socks2.almaden.ibm.com.1080: . ack
> 20272 win 31856 <nop,nop,timestamp 133834163 931434408> (DF) [tos 0x8]
> 23:11:04.986819 socks2.almaden.ibm.com.1080 > ihdehome..3005: .
> 21720:23168(1448) ack 1 win 15928 <nop,nop,timestamp 931434409
> 133834163>
> 23:11:04.986910 ihdehome..3005 > socks2.almaden.ibm.com.1080: . ack
> 20272 win 31856 <nop,nop,timestamp 133834186 931434409> (DF) [tos 0x8]
> 23:11:05.171812 socks2.almaden.ibm.com.1080 > ihdehome..3005: .
> 23168:24616(1448) ack 1 win 15928 <nop,nop,timestamp 931434189
> 133822936>
> 23:11:06.578067 socks2.almaden.ibm.com.1080 > ihdehome..3005: .
> 20272:21720(1448) ack 1 win 15928 <nop,nop,timestamp 931434412
> 133834186>
> 23:11:06.578184 ihdehome..3005 > socks2.almaden.ibm.com.1080: . ack
> 23168 win 30408 <nop,nop,timestamp 133834345 931434412> (DF) [tos 0x8]
>
> You can see the ACKs don't bear too much resemblance to the last byte
> transmitted, though the delay (in time) before the ACK is sent is
> substantial, over one quarter second. The result is that many packets
> wind up being retransmitted, and throughput is cut to about one-sixth of
> what I observe on "working" connections. This appears to be the fault
> of my box, though I don't know why.
>
> The machines that I've had slow connections with are running AIX 4.3,
> or, (surprisingly) Linux 2.2.7. I've gotten good performance to Windows
> NT 4.0 SP3, and AIX 4.2. I haven't tested enough machines to say if
> there is really a good correlation between the remote OS and the speed
> of the connection.
>
> Does anyone have any ideas what could be going on? I can mail more
> complete logs if anyone wants them.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Steve Ihde
Steve I think this may be the same problem, most of the sites that I was
ftp from were AIX sites, See below notes:
Joe
Chris Powell wrote:
> Joe Flasch wrote:
> -----
> Are you running 2.2.9 on a 6.0 build or on a 5.2 build?
>
> What wee seen is anything on a 6.0 build is having
> the problem that you have seen. I think it is a function of
> box speed more than certain sites. The problem starts when
> a IP frame gets lost. Then a long ack (8 sec +) retransmission loop
> starts. This goes on and on then some sites give up and
> reset the session. It may be that not all sites give up.
>
> On a 5.2 build with 2.2.8 there are no problems like this.
> So we think it is a 6.0 build problem and not a kernel problem.
> If you are running on a 5.2 build please email me.
> -----
>
> Joe,
>
> Thanks for responding.
>
> Actually, this is indeed on a 5.2 build, but a 5.2 that may have some RPM
> upgrade that makes things behave this way. The problem is in evidence
> for me with every 2.2 series kernel I've tried: 2.2.0, 2.2.3 and 2.2.9.
> I never tried 2.2.8.
>
> I wonder why the IP frame is getting lost, and why with only certain
> sites, especially considering slower boxes on the network have no
> problem. The problem box is an SMP 200 MHz P-Pro machine -- any thoughts
> on some tests I can run to help pinpoint the error? This machine is
> pretty much an experimental box anyway, so I'll be happy to try out some
> different things if you can make suggestions...
>
> Regards,
> Chris Powell
> --
> Christopher Powell Brick and Ivy Corporate Consulting
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.brickandivy.com/
We have a 486 box loaded with a 5.2 build and a 2.2.8 kernel with a token
ring card.
It seems to run with no ftp hangs. My box is a
166MH -P with 64 Meg of ram and a token ring card.
Maybe this is a function of speed with a 2.2.X kernel level.
We can ftp files at about 20K with no problem. When we try files around 1
meg or
larger we run into the hang. Is this what you are seeing? Do you see the
hang for
other type of IP functions ie. http, telnet, news groups access? I had the
problem
on http, and news groups access (I could not down load the list of all news
groups
from my news server).
I was thinking that it had something to do with the build
and not the kernel. That did not seem very possible. Now with your note I
am back to the
IP stack in the kernel. This seem very possible. I am going to look at
some code in the
IP statck.
Keep in touch
joe.
------------------------------
From: Ronald Cole <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
linux.redhat.install,linux.redhat.list,linux.redhat.misc,linux.redhat.rpm,linux.samba
Subject: Re: Redhat 6.0, IP Masq, and Samba HELP!!!!!!
Date: 25 May 1999 12:00:04 -0700
"Edmond Cheng" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> You have to recompile your kernel in order to use IP Masq.
This is not true for RH6.0... You have to edit /etc/sysconfig/network
to set FORWARD_IPV4="yes" and reboot. Then you can use ipchains to
enable masquerading (packet forwarding).
--
Forte International, P.O. Box 1412, Ridgecrest, CA 93556-1412
Ronald Cole <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Phone: (760) 499-9142
President, CEO Fax: (760) 499-9152
My PGP fingerprint: 15 6E C7 91 5F AF 17 C4 24 93 CB 6B EB 38 B5 E5
------------------------------
From: Mike Dion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Samba passwords - I need help!
Date: 25 May 1999 15:31:09 GMT
I can't get passwords to work with Samba. I'm connecting from a WIN95
client and can only see the shared services when my SMB password is set to
"NO PASSWORD". After scanning numerous Linux discussion groups and reading
the documentation found in /usr/doc/samba-n.n on my server, I'm still
stumped!
As documented, I created my smbpasswd file by:
cat /etc/passwd | mksmbpasswd.sh > /usr/local/samba/private/smbpasswd
The permissions on the parent directory and password file were set as
recommended in my Samba documentation. The smbpasswd file must be visible
as the NO PASSWORD setup does work!
In smb.conf, I have set these variables related to security and passwords:
# begin of smb.conf settings
security = user
password level = 8 # In the event that case is an issue
username level = 8 # Same as above
encrypt passwords = yes
smb passwd file = /usr/local/samba/private/smbpasswd
username map = /etc/smbusers # WIN95 usernames mapped to Linux usernames
domain logons = yes
# end of smb.conf settings
Am I missing something regarding password encryption and case? I'm running
RedHat Linux V5.2 and Samba v1.9.18p10.
Your help would be greatly appreciated.
================== Posted via SearchLinux ==================
http://www.searchlinux.com
------------------------------
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Bj=F6rn?= Gerhart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: remote-lp
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 21:06:51 +0200
Hello,
I have a small network running (1 server running Linux and 1 workstation
running Linux/WinNT). I set up a NIS-domain, and it works great.
I can print on the server directly, but when I try to print via the
workstation, there=B4s an error message:
your host does not have line printer access
although the workstation is "in" /etc/hosts.lpd and /etc/hosts.equiv
Any hints what could be wrong? Thanks in advance
Kind regards
Bjoern
-- =
Bjoern Gerhart e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
TFH-Berlin University of Applied Sciences
------------------------------
Reply-To: "Curt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "Curt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: IP Masquerade/Routing
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 14:34:53 -0500
If you're question is: Can I masquerade network 128.100.0.0? The answer is
yes. The same way you'd masq 198.168.x.y. The only drawback being if if
they try to access the REAL 128.100.0.0 network it will stay local. Make
sure you reject access to the 128.100.0.0 network from outside too.
Athol Marshall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> George,
>
> thanks for your input. The problem is for ME to dial into a remote system
> which has the address 128.100.0.0
>
> This may be (and now I know is) actually on the net somewhere, so I
shouldn't
> route to it directly - it should go via the default route to my ISP.
>
> The chances of a conflict are vanishingly small. I was just wondering if
> I could translate a private IP address for my routing purposes into a
> different IP address for the router at the other end. The reason being
that
> I will soon be connecting to various systems via ISDN/PPP and these
networks
> have invariably been set-up without reference to the valid private IP
numbers.
>
> Even if all the networks had used private address space, they might all
have
> chosen 192.168.0.0, for example, in which case I would still need some way
of
> differentiating them for routing purposes.
>
> George Georgakis wrote:
>
> > If I understand you correctly ...
>
>
>
------------------------------
From: "Terence Parker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: How to get samba&win98 talking
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 22:41:42 +0800
Have you tried setting the access level to 'WORKGROUP' rather than USER?
------------------------------
From: bryan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Anybody using DSL?
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 20:17:55 GMT
Peter Gutowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: We've been approached by a company called "Network Plus" which is offering
: connectivity to the internet using DSL (Digital Subscriber Line). The
: sales literature suggests a better bang for the buck than we're currently
: getting from our dedicated frame relay (56k) line. (Total charges "appear"
: to be about $170/month for 160K vs total of over $300/month we're now
: paying to phone company and ISP for 56K connection.)
I'm paying $200/mo for 1.5meg in (min - can burst up to 5meg) and 384
out. its pretty fast - when its up. I have a ping web page that
shows the history - www.grateful.net/ping.html - if you want to query
my graphs. my carrier is pachell ;-)
--
Bryan
------------------------------
From: XonXoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Can TELNET to Linux box, but then...
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 19:31:04 GMT
Personally, I'd suggest you create a user account and telnet withg that
and su to root.
> In article <mn%%2.3590$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "Shawn Pursley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > This is what I get when I attempt to TELNET:
> >
> > Red Hat Linux release 5.1 (Manhattan)
> > Kernel 2.0.34 on an i486
> > login: root
> > Password:
> > The system is going down on Mon Nov 16 19:04:36 1998
> >
> > Login incorrect
> >
--== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==--
---Share what you know. Learn what you don't.---
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux Redhat 6.0 and rogers@home
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 19:31:30 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Russell Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Can anybody tell me how to properly set up my @home service in redhat
6
> I am a newbie however I have found the network set up etc but seem
> unable to get it working.
>
>
Welp
A quick (not the best way) is to
open up a shell
netcfg &
put yer host name crXCXCXCV-a
go to interface tab and set it so it looks like this
eth0 <blank> dhcp inactive (something like that)
save
now it should be setup for dhcp
I don't know if it's necessary to do the above but just incase
now open up a shell and type
dhcpcd -h cr@#$@#$@#-a
that will start up dhcpcd
there used to be an easier way to get it going by using the ifup script
but they've changed it and added the pump daemon, no idea what thats all
about and how it relates to dhcpcd
The above should get you at least connected to the internet
--== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==--
---Share what you know. Learn what you don't.---
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Casper H.S. Dik - Network Security Engineer)
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.solaris
Subject: Re: Solaris 7 as NFS Server for Linux
Date: 25 May 1999 19:56:31 GMT
[[ PLEASE DON'T SEND ME EMAIL COPIES OF POSTINGS ]]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Yueshi) writes:
>treated as
>"nobody4:nogroup". I found only the "share"-option "anon=uid", which
>unfortunatly only substitutes the "nobody4" by a single uid and don't
>allow the Solaris disk to be used as a NFS-mounted home directory for
>Linux.
Why not? Why would a Linux NFS clietn need root access?
If it does, you can give it; eitehr with the "root=" mount option
or using "anon=0".
Casper
--
Expressed in this posting are my opinions. They are in no way related
to opinions held by my employer, Sun Microsystems.
Statements on Sun products included here are not gospel and may
be fiction rather than truth.
------------------------------
From: "F.P. Groeneveld" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: tcpdump: Socket type not supported
Date: 25 May 1999 20:02:24 GMT
Leon Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: Hi.
: tcpdump doesn't work on ip numbers, it runs on iterfaces.
: try
: tcpdump -i eth0 (or whatever the interface is and see how you go)
: cheers,
: leon
: Quoll Technology
derk# tcpdump -i ippp0
tcpdump: socket: Socket type not supported
derk# tcpdump -i eth0
tcpdump: socket: Socket type not supported
Still get the same problem...
Cheers,
Derk
------------------------------
From: "Steve Day" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Samba 1.9c & Windows NT WS 4.0 SP4 AND MS Data Access Pac 2.0
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 21:24:28 +0100
You may be better just turning on encrypted passwords with Samba.
Knowing Microsoft, they're probably ignoring the registry key or decided to
create another soemwhere else.
Good luck
Steve Day
Linear Designs
Palpatime <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Hi Folks,
>
> i have a problem with the MS Data Access Pack:
> When i install it on the NT Workstation then i cant get connected to a
Samba
> Share. The entry PLAINTEXTPASSWORD in the NT Registry
> is also set. It looks like the Data Access Pack is changing something to
the
> Encrypted Passwd System under NT ... Microsoft couldnt help.
> So if anyone got the same problem (and God Hope) a solution please message
> ... thx
>
>
------------------------------
From: root <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: What am I forgetting with PPP?
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 20:27:49 +0000
I am running RH 5.0 with the 2.0.31 kernel. I set up the PPP stuff as
per the ISP-Hookup HOWTO, and everything works fine as root, but if I
try getting on the net as a normal user, as soon as the handshake is
over the connection is dropped. I have no idea why. I am not using
RH's Network Config tool to do this. I created a group called
"pppusers" and added the users I wanted to it." I then changed the
ownership of /sbin/pppd and /sbin/chat to pppusers, and added a symlink
to /sbin/chat in /usr/bin (called chat). I also changed the ownership
of /var/lock to pppusers. There are no errors logged in
/etc/ppp/connect-errors. When I try connecting with a normal user,
/var/log/messages goes through the chatscript and then says this:
May 25 12:43:29 localhost pppd[409]: Serial connection established.
May 25 12:43:30 localhost pppd[409]: ioctl(PPPIOCGUNIT): Operation not
permitted
May 25 12:43:30 localhost pppd[409]: ioctl(PPPIOCGDEBUG): Operation not
permitted
May 25 12:43:30 localhost pppd[409]: Exit.
May 25 12:45:02 localhost kernel: PPP: ppp line discipline successfully
unregistered
When I am root, it looks something like this:
May 23 16:27:22 localhost pppd[630]: Serial connection established.
May 23 16:27:23 localhost pppd[630]: Using interface ppp0
May 23 16:27:23 localhost pppd[630]: Connect: ppp0 <--> /dev/modem
May 23 16:27:24 localhost pppd[630]: Remote message:
May 23 16:27:24 localhost pppd[630]: local IP address 149.99.139.58
May 23 16:27:24 localhost pppd[630]: remote IP address 149.99.137.254
May 23 16:27:24 localhost pppd[630]: proc file system not mounted
Note that I tried setting things up with network config but then decided
not to and erased the ppp interface as well as its line in pap-secrets
(I replaced "username ppp0 password" with "username * password"). This
is how it was when it was working, before I reinstalled linux.
I'd appreciate any help, cuz I'm stumped.
Regards,
Mladen
------------------------------
From: ulli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: AX88140AQ ? driver ? ethernetcard ?
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 20:09:07 +0200
Hy List!
i need some new driver for my ethernet card with the ax88140aq chip on.
Does an anybody have some, its a 10/100Mbit card, the driver i have
doesn�t compile (it�s for a linux 2.0.30 kernel. ) i need 2.2.5 or so...
have someone bind it to his system ??
(sorry for my english, :-) )
Greetings
ULLI
------------------------------
From: Matt Starnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Dual T1's?
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 11:41:46 -0500
Gary Rule wrote:
> We have a 24/7 Internet business and our ISP has a tendancy to go down once
> every month or two. We would like to purchase a second T1 as a backup. Can
> anybody give me any information or point me to some, about doing this? I
> know that we would have completely different IP numbers, I would like to be
> able to direct web traffic to that second set of numbers in case the first
> line went down...or is there an easier way?
> Thanks in advance,
> Gary R
I know here (Southwestern Bell territory) they bring out a maintenance T1
along with the production one when they do the install. We had a real storm
one night and the production T went down. I called them up and it was really
just a matter of plugging into the maintenace T1 and rebooting the csu/dsu.
You might want to check with your providor.
Matt
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
