Linux-Networking Digest #286, Volume #11 Wed, 26 May 99 00:13:36 EDT
Contents:
Re: [NEWBIE] serving www from win95box on LAN with linux gateway? ("Andrey Smirnov")
Re: IP masq problem : works well, then drops ("Andrey Smirnov")
Re: Iomega products and Linux (Chameleon)
Re: NFS and SETGID bit ignored (L J Bayuk)
Winbloze98-Telnet&FTP ? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
PPP and Default route ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: ip masquerading fine access control question (Ben Short)
Re: Redirection using ipchains? (Alexander Penev)
Re: Secondary DNS (Alexander Penev)
Using sendmail as a full mail server. ("Frank Apap")
3c509B problem solved ("Finbarr")
Re: PCAnywhere ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Have I been Hacked? (David Peavey)
FTP & Telnet Slow ("Dan Blaner")
Help me fir a Wedding (Jean-Christophe GONZATO)
Re: Linksys Etherfast 10/100 setup problem (Rich Piotrowski)
Re: Iomega products and Linux ("Gene Heskett")
Re: Local IP addresses (Lee Sau Dan ~{@nJX6X~})
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Andrey Smirnov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [NEWBIE] serving www from win95box on LAN with linux gateway?
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 14:56:47 -0700
Hello!
Port forwarding is the solution!
Good luck!
slynch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Hi all you helpful folks-
>
> I have a linuxbox with a static connection to the Internet, and a win95
> box on my LAN using the linuxbox as a gateway.
>
> I would like to run Apache on my win95 box to serve a filemaker pro
> database to the world, and am wondering if there is a way to do that
> with my present configuration? (I read something about port forwarding,
> but was unclear if that's a solution).
>
> If not, what's the best change to my set up (keeping my Linuxbox as the
> gateway) to make my win95 box into a webserver?
>
> thank you...
>
> Stefan Lynch
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Andrey Smirnov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: IP masq problem : works well, then drops
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 14:55:32 -0700
Hmmm!
Two hours... two hours is the default max lease time in dhcpd.conf (if you
copied it from HOWTOs).
Vincent Creusillet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Hello.. I've first installed Linux two days ago, as I needed IP
> masquerading. the set-up is, one 486DX4-100 w/Linux (RedHat 5.2,
> 2.0.36), two win95 comps, one hub, and one cable modem.
>
> after booting the linux box, I enable IP masquerading with the
> followings
> ipfwadm -F -p deny
> ipfwadm -F -a masquerade -S 192.168.1.0/24 -D 0/0
> ipfwadm -F -a deny -S 0/0 -D 0/0 -o
>
> and it works fine. The linux box gets a dynamic IP adress on eth0 from
> my ISP through DHCP, and has a local (192.168.1.1) alias IP on eth0:0
>
> Then, two hours sharp laters, the following happens : the linux box
> remains on-line, and I can browse from it just fine, but the IP alias on
> eth0:0 'disappears' from the ifconfig output (no other change from
> regular output, though), and the linux box is no longer accessible in
> any way from the two other comps.
>
> the linux install is a very basic one, straight from the CD, no extra
> modules or anything else running, but the networking daemons, and I
> didn't notice anything in the cron that would happen every two hours.
> However, when I log from one of my windows comp, the winipcfg shows that
> the duration of the lease on my IP is 2h.. so I'm guessing there's a
> connection of some kind..
>
> I've tried resetting the eth0:0 alias by command lines, as per the
> ipaliasing mini-howto linked from Linux.org, and either I messed up the
> command line somewhere, or it's not working.. the ifconfig output shows
> an eth0:0 addie again, but the masquerading won't work again, even after
> flushing and resetting the ipfwadm policies.. so for now, whenever I
> need both windows computer on-line, I need to reboot linux every two
> hours, which is very painful.. If someone knows of a howto covering that
> problem, or has any insights to help me get the thing working.. It would
> be greatly appreciated, as I'm really puzzled.
> Thank you in advance
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chameleon)
Subject: Re: Iomega products and Linux
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 14:59:51 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 24 May 1999 23:49:14 -0400, Dominic Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
>
>The address for Iomega is Iomega <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.
>
>The deceived customer.
>
>Dominic.
I have no problem with iomega scsi products under any Os; however, ide
versions of zip drives give the same problems in WindowsNT and Linux.
Sometimes not unmounting the drive properly and truncating the files
on the disk.
You are too honest and technical in your approach to iomega support.
Play dumb, they do not know what os you have unless you tell them.
Beside what you state, all they know is they have a very unsatisfied
customer. A lot companies "Do not Support Linux."
Take a different approch and get the some real help next time.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (L J Bayuk)
Subject: Re: NFS and SETGID bit ignored
Date: 26 May 1999 01:50:04 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>I have a problem with an NFS mount:
>
>The exported directory has the mask 2770, when I mkdir within it I get the
>bits inherited correctly...
>
>...but if I mount it via NFS and mkdir within the mount, the directory
>hasn't inherited the permissions. (it's 0755 instead).
I think this is the correct behavior. The setgid bit (2000) says:
inherit the group from the parent directory, and make new directories
setgid too. It does't affect the other mode bits, which come from
umask. So I think when you did mkdir from the 2 systems, maybe you
had a different umask?
>Another thing, if I try putting a @users(rw) in my exports file instead of
>the user name steve(rw) - it refuses to mount. ?
The exports file is looking for a hostname (or @netgroup name, but
the netgroup names only hosts). There is no such thing as exporting
to particular users; NFS exports to hosts.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Winbloze98-Telnet&FTP ?
Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 01:40:12 GMT
Whenever I try to connect to my linux server across my LAN using
either WS-FTP or CRT(telnet) My dial-up tries to initiate. What is the
easiest way to make my machines know that the linux server is local.
My lan IP range is 10.0.0. which isnt even an internet adress range.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: PPP and Default route
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 21:46:08 GMT
hi,
After establishing the PPP (dialup) link, the default route is not being
set. I have to set it manually all the time(route add default ppp0).
What do I need to do to get this set automatically.
thanx
krishna
--== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==--
---Share what you know. Learn what you don't.---
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ben Short)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: ip masquerading fine access control question
Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 12:40:29 +1000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> Dear netter,
>
> I am somewhat of a newbie to ip masquerading and wonder if you can
> show me how I can activate and deactivate an ip number from my rules.
> For example let say I have activated ip masking for two machines on
> my internal network. ie
>
> ipfwadm -F -a m -S aaa.bbb.ccc.180/32 -D 0.0.0.0/0
> ipfwadm -F -a m -S aaa.bbb.ccc.181/32 -D 0.0.0.0/0
>
> and now for some reason, I want to turn off access to machine aaa.bbb.ccc.180
> but leave the other one active. Right now all I know how to do is an
> ipconfig eth0 down
> but this isn't too nice because both machines now can't access the outside.
> There must be a way with ipfwadm where I can remove only the aaa.bbb.ccc.180
> without affecting aaa.bbb.ccc.181 I have read through the faqs but like
> usual, I missed it, so I apologize if it is in there. I will read it
> again
> just in case.
>
> Further more, is there a way you can restrict the bandwidth through one
> of the ip? ie allow only a 1200 bps through aaa.bbb.ccc.180 and give the
> rest of the bandwidth to the other machine? Hope you can do this.
>
> Any pointers, hints, solutions is so greatly appreciate.
>
> thanks in advance
>
why not simply:
ipfwadm -F -d m -S aaa.bbb.ccc.180/32 -D 0.0.0.0/0
-a adds the rule, -d deletes it.
Ben
--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Ben Short http://www.shortboy.dhs.org
Shortboy Productions mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*Remove n0spam to email me*
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
------------------------------
From: Alexander Penev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Redirection using ipchains?
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 22:44:11 GMT
You can also use an Apache server on your Linux box:
in the httpd.conf you must create the following virtual host
<VirtualHost www.yourdomain.tld>
ServerName www.yourdomain.tld
ServerAdmin root
DocumentRoot /home/somedir/
ProxyRequests On
ProxyPass / http://192.168.1.10/
</VirtualHost>
I assume 192.168.1.10 is the IP of your Win95 box
In this way you can have many web servers in your net (configured as
virtual hosts)
If you make a ip forwarding all requests on the port 80 on your Linux Box
will be redirected to your .
Hope I could help you
Ryan Smith wrote:
> I am in the very same situation! I've been looking for a way to redirect an
> incoming web connection to my gateway box to a web server running on my
> local network. If somebody knows something about this, please let me know!
>
> Ryan
>
> bill davidsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:7i6ulc$er0$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Am I missing something in ipchains? I would like to do redirection of
> > certain packets from another machine to a given port on another machine
> > on my network. Not masquerade, not port forwarding to a port on my
> > machine, just a general rewrite capability. The REDIRECT facility
> > doesn't seem to handle going to a remote host.
> >
> > For example, connections to port 80 from a network would go to port 3100
> > on another machine, possibly on another network.
> >
> > I am *not* looking for other ways to do this, I have several, I just
> > want to know if this capability is really missing, and I'd rather not
> > wade through the network code to see if I could do it using my own
> > ioctls or whatever. I did look at the code briefly, it didn't jump out
> > at me.
> >
> > --
> > bill davidsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> CTO, TMR Associates, Inc
> > One common problem is mistyping an email address and creating another
> > valid, though unintended, recipient. Always check the recipient's
> > address carefully when sending personal information, such as credit
> > card numbers, death threats or offers of sexual services.
------------------------------
From: Alexander Penev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Secondary DNS
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 22:50:25 GMT
CHOI wrote:
> Can anyone tell me how to setup a secondary DNS ? Do I need to copy the
> setting from master DNS to secondary ?
>
NO,
secondary domain.com 195.58.162.242 domain.com
^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^
^ Primary DNS server IP
> Tks.
------------------------------
From: "Frank Apap" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Using sendmail as a full mail server.
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 23:03:41 GMT
Ok I have spent a week getting sendmail and fetchmail setup so they work
good locally...(users can send each other mail). Now i wanna make it so
outside users can send emails... My linux box doesnt have a real host name
(its not registered) so the addresses are gonna be like username@ipaddress
right?
Well anyway my question is what are the steps I should take to convert from
sendmail working locally to real mailserver?
------------------------------
From: "Finbarr" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: 3c509B problem solved
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 13:21:59 +0100
I was having real problems with connecting two machines peer to peer
with 3c509B combo cards. I am running Slackware 3.6.
I used the setup disks on NT4 to configure the cards eeprom.
(in particular setting PnP to OFF).
I followed the excellent book by Fred Butzen and Christoper Hilton
"The Linux Network - ISBN 1-55828-589-X published by M&T Books"
and set the configurations up, rebuilt the kernels etc, but could not get
the damn things to ping each other. I tried BNC first, then bought a hub
and tried twisted pair. Still the same problem.
I was about to post here in desperation and then buy some ZYNX cards
instead (they at least support linux and supply their own driver for the
ZX345Q at USD99 each, by the way - http:\\store.znyx.com).
Anyway, then I found the problem, which is why I'm posting here, it
was that the IRQ I had chosen (10) was set in the BIOS of my machines
as "PCI/ISA PnP" and I changed this to "Legacy ISA" and it works.
Finbarr
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: PCAnywhere
Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 02:48:21 GMT
I see you have a couple of suggestions to try VNC. Here's a couple of
other options I'll bounce off you if for some reason you don't want to
use VNC.
1. You can set up a telnet demon on NT. Not very elegant but there are
many admin functions you can do with a command line.
2. Did you know that you can set up web administration on NT? That way
you can use Netscape on your Linux mochine to do the Admin thing. It's
been awhile since I used it but I think you can do a great majority of
the tasks with that kind of a setup. I don't remember how I set mine up
so you'd have to look around more or check the MS site.
BTW: I downloaded VNC and started looking at it but I got a little bit
intimidated by it. Can anybody share success/horror stories about it
with me? Is it worth the learning curve? Please send to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thanks,
Rich
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Indra Nusantara" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello All,
>
> I am really new to this Linux world. I have just succesfully setup a
RedHat
> 5.2 box.
>
> I have several NT servers that I usually administer from my Win98 PC
through
> PCAnywhere.
>
> Is there a way to do that in Linux ? I mean, can I remotely connect to
my NT
> PCAnywhere hosts from the LInux machine ?
>
> I really appreciate any sugestions. Thanks.
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> Indra Nusantara
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
--== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==--
---Share what you know. Learn what you don't.---
------------------------------
From: David Peavey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Have I been Hacked?
Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 02:23:55 GMT
I have RH5.2 loaded as an IP-Masquerade and firewall for my
computers at home. This morning I found the following
in /var/log/messages
May 23 04:41:43 c49590-a portmap[1670]: connect from 24.1.69.165
to callit(mountd): request from unauthorized host
May 23 04:41:48 c49590-a portmap[1671]: connect from 24.1.69.165
to callit(mountd): request from unauthorized host
May 23 06:29:08 c49590-a portmap[1676]: connect from 24.1.234.200
to callit(mountd): request from unauthorized host
May 23 06:29:12 c49590-a portmap[1677]: connect from 24.1.234.200
to callit(mountd): request from unauthorized host
May 23 08:24:29 c49590-a portmap[1682]: connect from
144.254.210.12 to getport(mountd): request from unauthorized host
May 23 08:25:07 c49590-a portmap[1683]: connect from
144.254.210.12 to getport(mountd): request from unauthorized host
May 23 08:36:20 c49590-a portmap[1684]: connect from
144.254.210.12 to getport(mountd): request from unauthorized host
May 23 08:36:30 c49590-a portmap[1685]: connect from
144.254.210.12 to getport(mountd): request from unauthorized host
May 23 08:36:40 c49590-a portmap[1686]: connect from
144.254.210.12 to getport(mountd): request from unauthorized host
May 23 08:37:16 c49590-a portmap[1687]: connect from
144.254.210.12 to getport(mountd): request from unauthorized host
May 23 08:37:26 c49590-a portmap[1688]: connect from
144.254.210.12 to getport(mountd): request from unauthorized host
May 23 08:37:36 c49590-a portmap[1689]: connect from
144.254.210.12 to getport(mountd): request from unauthorized host
May 23 08:42:04 c49590-a portmap[1690]: connect from 24.1.69.165
to callit(mountd): request from unauthorized host
May 23 08:42:09 c49590-a portmap[1691]: connect from 24.1.69.165
to callit(mountd): request from unauthorized host
May 23 08:43:43 c49590-a portmap[1692]: connect from
144.254.210.12 to getport(ypserv): request from unauthorized host
May 23 08:48:19 c49590-a portmap[1693]: connect from 128.5.1.90
to callit(pcnfsd): request from unauthorized host
May 23 09:09:04 c49590-a portmap[1696]: connect from
144.254.210.12 to getport(mountd): request from unauthorized host
May 23 09:16:09 c49590-a portmap[1697]: connect from
144.254.210.12 to getport(mountd): request from unauthorized host
May 23 09:19:24 c49590-a portmap[1698]: connect from
144.254.210.12 to getport(mountd): request from unauthorized host
May 23 09:21:45 c49590-a portmap[1699]: connect from
144.254.210.12 to getport(mountd): request from unauthorized host
May 23 09:23:28 c49590-a portmap[1700]: connect from
144.254.210.12 to getport(ypserv): request from unauthorized host
May 23 09:24:27 c49590-a portmap[1701]: connect from
144.254.210.12 to getport(ypserv): request from unauthorized host
May 23 09:26:53 c49590-a portmap[1702]: connect from
144.254.210.12 to getport(mountd): request from unauthorized host
May 23 09:27:03 c49590-a portmap[1703]: connect from
144.254.210.12 to getport(mountd): request from unauthorized host
May 23 09:27:13 c49590-a portmap[1704]: connect from
144.254.210.12 to getport(mountd): request from unauthorized host
May 23 10:29:32 c49590-a portmap[1707]: connect from 24.1.234.200
to callit(mountd): request from unauthorized host
May 23 10:29:37 c49590-a portmap[1708]: connect from 24.1.234.200
to callit(mountd): request from unauthorized host
May 23 11:22:02 c49590-a portmap[1711]: connect from
144.254.210.12 to getport(mountd): request from unauthorized host
May 23 12:25:29 c49590-a portmap[1714]: connect from
144.254.210.12 to getport(ypserv): request from unauthorized host
May 23 12:43:06 c49590-a portmap[1715]: connect from 24.1.69.165
to callit(mountd): request from unauthorized host
May 23 14:29:58 c49590-a portmap[1720]: connect from 24.1.234.200
to callit(mountd): request from unauthorized host
May 23 14:30:02 c49590-a portmap[1721]: connect from 24.1.234.200
to callit(mountd): request from unauthorized host
May 23 14:58:50 c49590-a identd[1722]: from: 130.207.7.21 (
santanni.cc.gatech.edu ) for: 63225, 21
May 23 14:58:51 c49590-a identd[1722]: Returned: 63225 , 21 :
NO-USER
May 23 14:58:52 c49590-a identd[1723]: from: 130.207.7.21 (
santanni.cc.gatech.edu ) for: 63225, 21
May 23 14:58:52 c49590-a identd[1723]: Returned: 63225 , 21 :
NO-USER
May 23 15:12:09 c49590-a identd[1726]: from: 193.63.255.4 (
swallow.doc.ic.ac.uk ) for: 63228, 21
May 23 15:12:09 c49590-a identd[1726]: Returned: 63228 , 21 :
NO-USER
May 23 16:43:25 c49590-a portmap[1729]: connect from 24.1.69.165
to callit(mountd): request from unauthorized host
May 23 16:43:29 c49590-a portmap[1730]: connect from 24.1.69.165
to callit(mountd): request from unauthorized host
May 23 18:30:32 c49590-a portmap[1735]: connect from 24.1.234.200
to callit(mountd): request from unauthorized host
May 23 18:30:37 c49590-a portmap[1736]: connect from 24.1.234.200
to callit(mountd): request from unauthorized host
May 23 20:43:45 c49590-a portmap[1741]: connect from 24.1.69.165
to callit(mountd): request from unauthorized host
May 23 20:43:50 c49590-a portmap[1742]: connect from 24.1.69.165
to callit(mountd): request from unauthorized host
May 23 22:31:01 c49590-a portmap[1747]: connect from 24.1.234.200
to callit(mountd): request from unauthorized host
May 23 22:31:06 c49590-a portmap[1748]: connect from 24.1.234.200
to callit(mountd): request from unauthorized host
May 24 00:44:01 c49590-a portmap[1753]: connect from 24.1.69.165
to callit(mountd): request from unauthorized host
May 24 00:44:05 c49590-a portmap[1754]: connect from 24.1.69.165
to callit(mountd): request from unauthorized host
May 24 02:31:24 c49590-a portmap[1759]: connect from 24.1.234.200
to callit(mountd): request from unauthorized host
May 24 02:31:28 c49590-a portmap[1760]: connect from 24.1.234.200
to callit(mountd): request from unauthorized host
May 24 04:02:03 c49590-a PAM_pwdb[1791]: (su) session opened for
user nobody by (uid=99)
May 24 04:04:19 c49590-a PAM_pwdb[1791]: (su) session closed for
user nobody
YIKES! LOOK at last two lines ABOVE!
By the way, I did have ftp, telnet, and gopher commented
out in my inetd.conf file. (This was an attempt to keep
the hackers from doing those to my machine). OK - I'm
still a rookie but this sounds pretty scary. Nobody on
my network at home was using their computers. Nobody I
know was trying to contact my network or firewall. All
the activity was unexpected.
So I went into inetd.conf and commented out every single
service and rebooted. The following showed
up tonight.
...
May 25 01:56:27 c49590-a kernel: IPX Portions Copyright (c) 1995
Caldera, Inc.
May 25 01:56:27 c49590-a kernel: Appletalk 0.17 for Linux
NET3.035
May 25 01:56:27 c49590-a kernel: ne.c:v1.10 9/23/94 Donald Becker
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
May 25 01:56:27 c49590-a kernel: NE*000 ethercard probe at 0x280:
00 40 05 e4 f9 b7
May 25 01:56:27 c49590-a kernel: eth0: NE2000 found at 0x280,
using IRQ 5.
May 25 01:56:27 c49590-a kernel: NE*000 ethercard probe at 0x300:
00 40 05 e4 fa 04
May 25 01:56:27 c49590-a kernel: eth1: NE2000 found at 0x300,
using IRQ 10.
May 25 01:56:30 c49590-a inetd[317]: #exec/tcp: unknown service
May 25 01:56:30 c49590-a inetd[317]: #dtalk/tcp: unknown service
May 25 02:28:05 c49590-a portmap[362]: connect from 24.1.234.200
to callit(mountd): request from unauthorized host
May 25 02:28:08 c49590-a portmap[363]: connect from 24.1.234.200
to callit(mountd): request from unauthorized host
May 25 02:47:45 c49590-a portmap[364]: connect from 24.1.69.165
to callit(mountd): request from unauthorized host
May 25 02:47:49 c49590-a portmap[365]: connect from 24.1.69.165
to callit(mountd): request from unauthorized host
May 25 04:02:04 c49590-a PAM_pwdb[396]: (su) session opened for
user nobody by (uid=99)
May 25 04:03:42 c49590-a PAM_pwdb[396]: (su) session closed for
user nobody
There it is again! ^^^^
May 25 06:28:29 c49590-a portmap[441]: connect from 24.1.234.200
to callit(mountd): request from unauthorized host
May 25 06:28:33 c49590-a portmap[442]: connect from 24.1.234.200
to callit(mountd): request from unauthorized host
May 25 06:48:01 c49590-a portmap[443]: connect from 24.1.69.165
to callit(mountd): request from unauthorized host
May 25 06:48:05 c49590-a portmap[444]: connect from 24.1.69.165
to callit(mountd): request from unauthorized host
This is me vvv
May 25 10:04:20 c49590-a PAM_pwdb[352]: (login) session opened
for user root by (uid=0)
May 25 10:04:20 c49590-a login[352]: ROOT LOGIN ON tty1
May 25 10:04:20 c49590-a PAM_pwdb[352]: (login) session closed
for user root
May 25 10:05:15 c49590-a PAM_pwdb[353]: (login) session opened
for user root by (uid=0)
May 25 10:05:15 c49590-a login[353]: ROOT LOGIN ON tty2
May 25 10:05:15 c49590-a PAM_pwdb[353]: (login) session closed
for user root
Any Clues?
------------------------------
From: "Dan Blaner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: FTP & Telnet Slow
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 22:20:26 -0400
When trying to FTP to my linux box, I get an immediate connection message,
but it takes another two minutes before I get a login prompt. When I try to
telnet to it, it takes about five minutes. Any ideas? This happens even if
I FTP to localhost.
I'm using a 3Com 3C509 and RedHat 5.0.
Thanks.
------------------------------
From: Jean-Christophe GONZATO <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.music.midi,comp.os.geos.misc,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Help me fir a Wedding
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 16:47:44 +0200
Hi every News_surfers
I need you help to make a surprise for two of my friends (David and
Magali) which have planned to get married next 07-03-1999.
May you lost 2 minutes for me, please, by filling a simple wishes
weeding form located at :
http://dept-info.labri.u-bordeaux.fr/~gonzato/DavidMag
In advance, I send you many thanks.
Jean-Christophe
------------------------------
From: Rich Piotrowski <rpiotrow*nospammin'*@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Linksys Etherfast 10/100 setup problem
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 22:30:55 -0500
On Mon, 24 May 1999, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>I'm trying to set up my Linksys Etherfast 10/100 to run on a Linux box
>but can't seem to get Linux to recognize it. When the machine boots up
>I get these messages:
>% Setting up Network Device eht0
>% SCIOSIFADDR: No such device
>% SCIOSIFBRDADDR: No such device
>% SCIOSIFNETMASK: No such device
>[Using SuSE 5.1 kernel 2.0.33]
>
>/proc/pci gives the following:
>Bus 0 device 9 function 0:
>Ethernet controller: Unknown vendor unknown device (rev 32)
>Vendor id=11ad. Device id=2 Medium devsel. Fast back-to-back capable.
>Irq 11. Master Capable. Latency=64 I/O at 0xe800 Non-prefetchable
>32-bit memory at 0xe5000000
>
>I compiled the tulip driver and when I do "insmod tulip", I get this
>message:
>% /lib/modules/2.0.33/net/tulip.o: couldn't find the kernel version the
>module was compiled for.
>
>Any ideas about what's causing the problem? I'd really appreciate some
>help. Thanks in advance.
>
>Jay Oram
>
>
>--== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==--
>---Share what you know. Learn what you don't.---
Jay,
I'm not sure this will solve your problem but..
Try updating to the 2.0.36 kernel. I have three of those cards working here
just fine with the server running 2.0.36 on RedHat 5.2. The two clients are
running kernerl 2.2.9 on RedHat 6.0. The version of the "tulip" driver that
seems to work best is 0.89H.
Rich Piotrowski
------------------------------
Date: 25 May 99 23:10:18 -0500
From: "Gene Heskett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Iomega products and Linux
Reply to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Gene Heskett sends Greetings to Chameleon ;
> On 24 May 1999 23:49:14 -0400, Dominic Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>>
>>
>>The address for Iomega is Iomega <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.
>>
>>The deceived customer.
>>
>>Dominic.
> I have no problem with iomega scsi products under any Os; however,
> ide versions of zip drives give the same problems in WindowsNT and
> Linux. Sometimes not unmounting the drive properly and truncating
> the files on the disk.
> You are too honest and technical in your approach to iomega support.
> Play dumb, they do not know what os you have unless you tell them.
> Beside what you state, all they know is they have a very unsatisfied
> customer. A lot companies "Do not Support Linux."
> Take a different approch and get the some real help next time.
Excuse me, but they have an 'attitude' vis-a-vis windoze, and its time
they 'got over it'. I've dealt with them before, and I filed it away
for future reference that we should never admit to anything but being a
windoze user when dealing with them.
I'm not basicly a dishonest person, and it gets under my skin mightily
to have to feed these idiots boatloads of bull muffins to get the
warranty promised on the paper in the box.
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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Lee Sau Dan ~{@nJX6X~})
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.next.sysadmin
Subject: Re: Local IP addresses
Date: 25 May 1999 20:28:28 +0800
>>>>> "Erik" == Erik Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Erik> 192.168.0.255 is the the so-called broadcast
Erik> address. I don't know it's exact purpose.
As its name implies, it is used for broadcasting IP packets to the
whole subnet. Experiment: "ping 192.168.0.255".
Erik> Also, address 192.168.0.0 is often reserved.
This is used for identifying the whole subnet.
--
Lee Sau Dan $(0,X)wAV(B(Big5) ~{@nJX6X~}(HZ)
.----------------------------------------------------------------------------.
| http://www.cs.hku.hk/~sdlee e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
`----------------------------------------------------------------------------'
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
