Linux-Networking Digest #289, Volume #11 Wed, 26 May 99 07:13:40 EDT
Contents:
Re: Please help me get DNS server running (Lesha Zinoviev)
2 modems to provide aggregate bandwidth possible? (no multilink)
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Win98 box with Modem to a linux Box (Gilford Wimbley)
Re: Are 2 DNS servers a good idea? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Are internal IP DNSes a bad idea? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: thanks to all linux 'tech supporters' ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Two 3c509B's --> problems.. (Gilford Wimbley)
Re: Linux: ICMP Redirect, IP Source Routing unterdruecken (Detlef Bosau)
Re: knfsd doesn't follow mounts? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: tcpdump: Socket type not supported ("F.P. Groeneveld")
Re: PPP and Default route (Lesha Zinoviev)
smtp without registered domain? (Son Trung Nguyen)
connecting-computers (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Fran=E7ois?= Patte)
Re: Are internal IP DNSes a bad idea? (sven vahar)
Re: ipport or ipautofw with Netmeeting (Bernd Eckenfels)
Re: Kernel 2.2.x: PPP freezes (solved!) (Chameleon)
Re: IP Masquerading ("Tad")
Setting up a mail server (Jason Sangster)
Re: NIS/NFS file permissions (Roope Anttinen)
Re: LINUX ability to handle large beowulf clusters (Josef =?iso-8859-1?Q?M=F6llers?=)
Req: Samba configuration help.... ("brett" @dropzone.co.za>)
recommendations on Network card makes and models? ("Chris Fanning")
Re: DNS Server setup (Patrick Colbeck)
Kernel - where from?? (Adam Evans)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Lesha Zinoviev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Please help me get DNS server running
Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 10:25:51 +0400
Do you have an entry 192.168.1.254 in your /etc/hosts file?
Alex.
Gary Helbig wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm trying to get my DNS server running, and it's giving me serious
> grief.
>
> I have named.conf set up according to the HOWTO. There is the
> 0.0.127.in-addr.arpa zone, and my domain (ghelbig.com) zone.
>
> The /var/named entries seem to be correct.
>
> The server will start (with no warnings/errors), and say the zones
> are loaded.
>
> The server also says that it's listening. On 127.0.0.1:53 (lo) and
> 192.168.1.254:53 (eth0).
>
> I can ping the zone (ghelbig.com) by name, that works.
>
> If I put 127.0.0.1 in resolv.conf (as the nameserver), it works.
> But if I put 192.168.1.254 as the nameserver, it times out. I can see
> it trying to hit the port (the net activity light flashes), but I get
> the message:
>
> *** Can't find server name for address 192.168.1.254: No response from
> server
> *** Default servers are not available
>
> And I can't for the life of me figure out what's going wrong.
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Gary
> ghelbigATmailcityDOTcom
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: 2 modems to provide aggregate bandwidth possible? (no multilink)
Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 07:10:10 GMT
Here's something I've been thinking about, not sure whether it's been
posted before or not (all posts I checked always dealt with multilink
connections).
Scenario 1: Say I have a linux box with two modems in it. Now say that
my ISP allows multiple logins on the same account and these are dynamic
IP accounts. Is it possible to use each modem to connect to the ISP
using 2 phone lines and somehow "join" the bandwidth of both connections
seamlessly without using multilink (shotgun)? This doesn't have to be
necessarily at the packet level. A program could be written to check the
load on ppp0 and if it is higher than ppp1, send the file through ppp1,
etc. This could be useful in web browsing where for example:
html page with 4 gifs:
(ppp0 and ppp1 idle)
send GET request for gif1 to ppp0
(ppp0 in use, ppp1 idle)
send GET request for gif2 to ppp1
(ppp0 and ppp1 same load)
send GET request for gif3 to ppp0
(ppp0 under heavier load than ppp1)
send GET request for gif4 to ppp1
...etc
Scenario 2: Two linux boxes, one modem on each, one NIC on each, and a
hub. Say each kernel has routing & masquerading support, box1 has
192.1.168.1, box2 192.1.168.2 for the private LAN. Would it be possible
to do something similar to the above, by indicating both .1 and .2 as
gateways on each box? (both box1 and box2 would have 2 entries in route
- .1, .2) Does linux do load balancing if you use multiple routers or is
it like NT where it only uses one gateway unless it fails, then it uses
the next one on the list? Is there any software out there to do this if
not?
If anyone knows that doing something along those lines (both scenarios)
is theoretically possible/impossible let me know (either to ng or
email). Thanks.
-dr0ne
--== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==--
---Share what you know. Learn what you don't.---
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gilford Wimbley)
Subject: Re: Win98 box with Modem to a linux Box
Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 05:13:44 GMT
On Tue, 25 May 1999 16:54:01 GMT, "THE FREAKING HAMMER"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I have a win98 box that has a cable modem hooked up to it. I also have
>sygate hook on the win98 box. When i use another box that has win98 on it,
>it works fine with dhcp.
> But now when i want to hook up a linux box as a client and use dhcp it
>doesn't work. I have also tried to just assign an ip address like
>192.168.0.9 to the linux box in hopes of it working, it hasen't. Thanks in
>advance for any help you could give,
>
>Wolfgang Pelow
>
>
I can't really understand your setup from your description. But I can
tell you this. Linux probably won't try to be a DHCP client unless
you tell it to somehow. Maybe check out the man page for the
ifconfig command.
What is a "sygate hook?"
regards,
GW
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Are 2 DNS servers a good idea?
Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 07:17:48 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
tchite <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There's just one little hitch. If I want an internal client
> to find an INTERNAL resourse, my DNS server tells
> them the EXTERNAL IP address and of course then
> the clients can't find that resource.
Note to other posters: the above means that the machines in question
should be reachable using TWO DIFFERENT addresses -- meaning there is no
way to implement this using a single instance of bind. This isn't an
issue of some machines being internal and other external, it's a case of
certain machines needing to be located using the *same* *name* from both
the internal and external networks. That requires two different ways of
doing hostname lookups [either two instances of bind, two DNS servers,
or DNS+hosts lookups].
> (the packets fly out the NAT router, hit the external NIC
> and never return)
You could always set up your NAT router to send the packets "back"...
but that's not the "best" solution.
> I've put HOSTS files on all the client machine inside
> the network that sort of works but it's all a kludge.
Actually, that's what hosts files are for -- it's not a kludge. Take a
look at `rsync` or a cron script using `scp` [or `rcp`] if you're
worried about keeping hosts files up to date on multiple machines.
> I've heard of others that solve this problem by putting
> up 2 DNS servers: 1 for external clients and 1 for
> internal clients. This seems like it would work, but
> it seems like double the work.
That's the "proper" solution [and the one most serious admins I know
have implemented]. To simplify things a bit, you could give your DNS
machine two IP addresses and bind an instance of bind to each address.
That only really saves you a piece of hardware, but that might make a
big difference for a small home network.
> What's the slickiest, savviest, way to get a DNS server
> to handle internal and external clients?
AFAIK, the only solutions are those outlined above. bind does not
distinguish between various types of clients connecting to it, and so
there is no way to configure it to return one address for "external"
machines and another for "internal". At least, none that I know of
[anyone care to contradict this?].
> Or maybe I should just redo my entire network?
No need. Using a hosts file is the simplest method, and there's nothing
"wrong" about it. If that isn't feasible [lots of non-Unix non-savvy
users on your network] and you really must have true DNS for internal
lookups, a second instance of bind [either on the same box or a
different one] is your only choice.
> Thanks for any thoughts!
Sure. HTH.
--
-Bill Clark
Systems Architect
ISP Channel
http://locale.ispchannel.com/
--== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==--
---Share what you know. Learn what you don't.---
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Are internal IP DNSes a bad idea?
Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 07:24:09 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
tchite <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> For example, if I wanted to use 2 web servers, I don't
> know how I would use NAT to route the correct packet
> to the correct web server if I only have 1 external IP
> address. Perhaps it can't be done. Of course I don't
> reeealllly need 2 web servers, but I'm just wondering.
>
> It seems like I would have to have a NAT that
> understood HTTP 1.1 to make it work.
Nope, a web server that understands HTTP 1.1 [eg Apache] running on one
of your machines would work just fine.
Set up a web server on one of your boxes [your gateway box is a good
candidate], and configure two "Name Virtual Hosts" on that box. Set one
[or both] of them to Proxy for a different machine on your internal
network. Essentially, you will be using that instance of Apache as a
HTTP router [hence my suggestion that it be your gateway box, since it's
already routing the rest of your traffic]. There is decent
documentation on the Apache site [http://www.apache.org] on how to do
this. Look up "Name Virtual Host" and "ProxyPass".
> Thanks for any ideas!
No problem. HTH.
--
-Bill Clark
Systems Architect
ISP Channel
http://locale.ispchannel.com/
--== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==--
---Share what you know. Learn what you don't.---
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: thanks to all linux 'tech supporters'
Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 07:31:59 GMT
In article <7if01q$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"donnell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [...] As a newbie
> introducing myself to linux, the support I've received from the linux
> community has been invaluable in setting up my network, configuring
> Samba and PPP. As another person joins the linux community, they in
> turn are able to demonstrate the benefits of a linux OS to there
> colleagues and friends and the community grows.
> Keep up the good work, thanks
While I appreciate your sentiment, I'd like to point out that many of
the people who follow this newsgroup and who provide help and advice are
_not_ part of the "linux community". I myself am primarily a FreeBSD
user. I learned Unix on a SunOS box. My first *home* Unix was System
V. I am not at all unusual among the followers of this group.
Unix is Unix, for the most part ["Proper Use" of the name
notwithstanding :)]. Furthermore, it existed for over two full decades
before Linux came about.
Don't get me wrong -- I very much appreciate the fact that Linux has
done more for the popularity of Unix in a few short years than anything
else did in all the years prior -- but if you're going to give Kudos,
give them where they're due: The Unix community as a whole, not just
Linux.
--
-Bill Clark
System Architect
ISP Channel
http://locale.ispchannel.com/
--== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==--
---Share what you know. Learn what you don't.---
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gilford Wimbley)
Subject: Re: Two 3c509B's --> problems..
Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 05:01:22 GMT
On Tue, 25 May 1999 19:02:38 +0300, Ville Nummela <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>I have a problem with two 3c509B Cyclones; If I plug in just one card,
>everything works fine. If I insert another card, linux says it has found
>one card but it doesn't work.. any ideas..?
>
>--
> | ViGe / gasp inc. | http://www.lut.fi/~vnummela | [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
> | It Has To Work. - RFC 1925 |
>
Um, I have always read that linux only probes for one ehternet card at
bootup, but that wouldn't neccessarily explain why neither of them
work. That could be an interrupt conflict. Maybe they both have the
same interrupt, so when they are both there they fail? Just a
thought.
Good luck.
GW
------------------------------
Date: 26 May 1999 08:19:00 +0200
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Detlef Bosau)
Crossposted-To: de.comm.internet.routing
Subject: Re: Linux: ICMP Redirect, IP Source Routing unterdruecken
[EMAIL PROTECTED] meinte am 26.05.99
zum Thema "Re: Linux: ICMP Redirect, IP Source Routing unterdruecken":
> In comp.os.linux.networking Detlef Bosau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote: Wenn ein Design Stuss ist, und icmp redirects sind Stuss,
> > zwar aus der Historie erklaerbar, da hat man ja alles moegliche
> > in den DoD Salat gemengt, aber es ist und bleibt Stuss, kann man
> > es nun langsam ja mal verabschieden.
>
> Hmm... ich finde sie praktisch. Spart eine Menge Arbeit. NT lebt
> davon.
Eben. Darum filtern wir Redirects ja auch weg. Damit NT endlich
stirbt.
Detlef
--
Detlef Bosau [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bienroder Weg 79 Tel.: +49 531 303383
D2: +49 172 6819937
38106 Braunschweig, Germany Fax: +49 531 303364
>>>> PGP Public Key als Empfangsbestaetigung <<<<
## CrossPoint v3.1 R ##
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: knfsd doesn't follow mounts?
Date: 26 May 1999 08:47:39 GMT
Bart N. Locanthi spoke these words of wisdom:
: the new, improved linux nfs isn't letting clients see mounted file systems
: for me.
: for example, if /usr is a mounted file system, then a client who mounts /
: via nfs can't see anything in /usr.
: this can't be right - it's either a bug or a config problem.
: anyone got an answer?
I believe so. The kernel configurations has a point:
CONFIG_NFSD_SUN:
If you would like for the server to allow clients to access
directories that are mount points on the local filesystem
(this is how nfsd behaves on Sun systems), say yes here. If unsure,
say N. x
You can activate this option under
filesystems->network file systems->nfs-serversupport->emulate
SUN NFS Server (NEW)
This is for 2.2.7
Recompile your kernel, and you should be set.
Bye,
Mike
--
<< the above email addr might disappear, reply to: >>
<< Michael.Sievers -(at)- desy.de >>
Black holes are where God divided by zero.
------------------------------
From: "F.P. Groeneveld" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: tcpdump: Socket type not supported
Date: 26 May 1999 06:38:19 GMT
Stefan Monnier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:>>>>> "F" == F P Groeneveld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
:> derk# tcpdump -i ippp0
:> tcpdump: socket: Socket type not supported
:> derk# tcpdump -i eth0
:> tcpdump: socket: Socket type not supported
: You either haven't compiled the packet filter in the kernel or you have it
: compiled as a module and you have to load it manually with
Erf. I don't recall compiling one in. Will have to look at home.
: insmod af_packet
: Now, I don't know why it doesn't get autoloaded and I'd love to have
: that part "fixed", but in the meantime....
This'll do for me. Thanks!
Cheers,
Derk
------------------------------
From: Lesha Zinoviev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: PPP and Default route
Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 10:59:38 +0400
1.Probably, tou must add to your chat script something like:
DEFROUTE=yes
In RedHat such scripts located at /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/
2.Do you have another default routes? There are only single def. route
can exist in system.
Alex.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> 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.---
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Son Trung Nguyen)
Subject: smtp without registered domain?
Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 06:46:51 GMT
Would it be possible to run an smtp server without having a registered
domain name? I mean suppose you can set up a 7/24 connected machine
that has a routable ip. Can I then run an smtp server on such a machine?
I have been pondering about it, but wonder how such a server could
possibly work, if you haven't done shell out your $100 US for a .com domain
name. Would someone please clarify this for me. thanks in advance
------------------------------
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Fran=E7ois?= Patte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: connecting-computers
Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 09:05:51 +0200
> I'd like to connect another computer (pc under windows or mac) with mine
> (linux red-hat) in order to copy or install files exactly in the same
> way as I do on my hard disk beetween linux partition and windows
> partition. Is that possible? and how?
>
> Could you give me details?
>
> Thank you.
-- Fran�ois Patte. UFR de math�matiques et informatique.
45 rue des St P�res. 75270 Paris Cedex 06
Tel: 01 44 55 35 59 -- Fax: 01 44 55 35 35
http://www.math-info.univ-paris5.fr/~patte
------------------------------
From: sven vahar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Are internal IP DNSes a bad idea?
Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 10:48:15 +0300
> candidate], and configure two "Name Virtual Hosts" on that box. Set
then he still has to register another name for the same IP to be able to
use name based virtual hosts... maybe it would be simpler to use the
same hostname but different port? myhost.dot:8001 or something and then
just redirect from that port to the other web-server?
sven
------------------------------
From: Bernd Eckenfels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: ipport or ipautofw with Netmeeting
Date: 25 May 1999 00:28:25 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I have read a few web pages that say I can use ipautofw to enable
> Netmeeting conferences successfully through my Linux firewall. I have
> also read that ipportfw is a replacement for ipautofw. Can I use
> ipportfw to enable Netmeeting as well? I have PC Anywhere working with
> ipportfw but have had no luck with Netmeeting. Any help on this would
> be greatly appreciated.
Hmm... ipautofw is not the same as ipportfw. The first is an automatic
Masquerading Protocol handler the seconds is a port derirector. Use the new
"ipmasqadm" to configure the autofw part of the linux 2.2. masquerading.
... from the man page ...
MODULE autofw - Auto-forwarding
This module is, under some circustances, capable of han�
dling application protocolos that don't have support as
specific masq modules. Kernel must have been compiled
with
autofw -h
Command help. By now please refer to it.
For lot of useful info about using autofw please visit
http://ipmasq.home.ml.org
MODULE portfw - Port-forwarding
This module is able to forward to-firewall packets to
internal hosts, based on address and port specification.
portfw -h
Command help. By now please refer to it.
MODULE mfw - fwmark-forwarding
This module allows forwarding to-firewall packets to
internal hosts, based on fwmark matching. See ipchains(8)
for setting up firewall rules with fwmarking. Also please
note that because this module acts only in first packet
connection, it makes sense to add -y ipchains switch to
TCP fwmark rules.
Greetings
Bernd
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chameleon)
Subject: Re: Kernel 2.2.x: PPP freezes (solved!)
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 00:59:40 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 24 May 1999 20:18:14 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kris) wrote:
>Hi kite@NoSpam.%inetport.com (Clifford Kite),
>
>On bootup, the kernel reported the serial ports...
>
>ttyS01 at 0x02f8 (irq = 3) is a 16550A
>ttyS02 at 0x03e8 (irq = 4) is a 16550A
>
>Of course, it got the UART type completely right, but the IRQ wrong, so
>I was setting the UART manually using the settings in the setserial
>script which was already made. D'OH!!!.
>
Sorry, I did not see the whole post.
It sounds like you changed the UART address thus remapping the irqs to
your serial ports? or your actual serial port UART address was using
the same irq as your modem?
Wouldn't this be the same as changing the irq?
In the past when the actual serial port address is using the same irq
-- say com2, I change the dip switches on the modem to com4 and a
different irq thus correct the irq problem in the bios.
------------------------------
From: "Tad" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: IP Masquerading
Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 00:14:58 -0700
No...... it can be dynamic or static.
Thunderbolt19 wrote in message <7if7g5$cba$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>Do I have to have a static IP to do IP Masquerading if Im dialed into my
ISP
>via a modem? Thanks...
>
>--
>Eric Waters
>Total Distribution, Inc.
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
------------------------------
From: Jason Sangster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Setting up a mail server
Date: 26 May 1999 06:31:06 GMT
i have just received my first cp of Linux Redhat ver6. Could someone help
me through setting up a mail server?
Newbie
Jason
================== Posted via SearchLinux ==================
http://www.searchlinux.com
------------------------------
From: Roope Anttinen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: NIS/NFS file permissions
Date: 26 May 1999 09:40:36 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> we're setting up a linux network.. The user/passwords verify through
> NIS, then it takes the user to that specific home directory.. But after
> that it will not let the user have write access to there home dir.. Nor
> will it let us start Xwindows...
Is the home directory exported (rw) from the NFS server? After the client is
able to write to the NFS share the problem with X may go also. I guess that
the X-session is trying to create .xsession-errors in the home directory and
because the share is mounted read-only, file creation files resulting failed
X-session.
Roope
--
MicroSoft? is that some kind of a toilet paper?
PS: Look for address here, not from headers. And remove NOSPAM's
___________________________________________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED] / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
+358 9 812 7567 / +358 500 445 565 / +358 49 445 565
http://myy.helia.fi/~anttiner/index.html
===========================================================================
Helsinki Business Polytechnic - Institute of information technology
------------------------------
From: Josef =?iso-8859-1?Q?M=F6llers?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: LINUX ability to handle large beowulf clusters
Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 08:18:57 +0200
Jon Roberts wrote:
> =
> I was talking with a friend who is researching a supercomputer design
> that may become one of the top 10 machines in the world. I mentioned
> Beaowulf Linux clustering and the response was that Linux is good but
> can't support more than about 300 nodes in a cluster (and they plan on
> being larger than that). Is this true? If there IS a way around this
> limitation I'd like to know so I can make further recommendations for
> Linux to him.
There was a "Linux Cluster Event" run by a German TV station (WDR)
during its "ComputerNacht" event last december. See
http://www.uni-paderborn.de/cs/heiss/linux/cluster/artikel/cluster.html
(Sorry, but since the event is so long ago, there is little information
left, so all I could find was this German article)
They connected more than 512 Linux systems to solve some equations and
render a couple of films. Apparently they made it into the Guinness Book
of Records ...
Hope this helps,
Josef
-- =
PS Die hier dargestellte Meinung ist die persoenliche Meinung des
Autors!
PS This article reflects the autor=B4s personal views only!
------------------------------
From: "brett" <freakfaller<nospam>@dropzone.co.za>
Subject: Req: Samba configuration help....
Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 11:54:33 +0200
I am fairly new to Linux, and not having much luck. Perhaps someone can
suggest where I am going wrong.
Here are my computer configurations:
Computer Number 1
Name:khaoz
OS : Windows NT Workstation SP5
IP : 192.168.0.50 Mask 255.255.255.0
Workgroup : WORLD
Computer Number 2
Name: raven
OS : Windows 98
IP : 192.168.0.60 Mask 255.255.255.0
Workgroup : WORLD
Computer Number 3
Name : primate
OS : Redhat 6.0
IP: 192.168.0.55 Mask 255.255.255.0
All that I want to do is to share two directories on my Linux box. One must
be available to everyone, the other must only be available to the user
bretts with the password d3b0rchary.
I tried getting this to work with slackware for ages and the a friend
suggested I installed Redhat. I installed Redhat 6.0 from the CD and chose
to install everything. I ensured the samba was started.
I created an account called bretts by typing useradd bretts and then
assigned him the password d3b0rchary. I also created an account called
pcguest by typing useradd pcguest and didn't assign it a password.
I created a directory /user/private. Made bretts owner and changed to mode
to 750.
I then created a /etc/smb.conf file as follows
[global]
workgroup=world
printing = bsd
printcap name = /etc/printcap
load printers = yes
guest account = pcguest
security=user
log file = /var/log/log.%m
lock directory = /var/locks
share modes = yes
[homes]
comment = Home Directories
browseable = no
read only = no
create mode = 0750
[public]
comment = Temporary file space
path = /tmp
read only = yes
public = yes
[private]
comment = Fred's Service
path = /usr/private
valid users = bretts
public = no
writable = yes
printable = no
AT this point I restarted the Samba and tried to connect. I log into my
Windows NT or windows 98 machines using bretts and d3b0rchary. I am able to
see my primate in my browse lists but when I connect, I am promped to login.
Access is always denied.
What am I overlooking ?Am I creating my guest account correctly.
------------------------------
From: "Chris Fanning" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: recommendations on Network card makes and models?
Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 12:01:02 +0200
Hi,
I'm in the proccess of updating hubs and switches to 10/100 Mb.
I'd like to change the network card installed in a server running Linux RH
5.2
At the moment I've got a ZNYX card (PCI) in a Primergy 100.
Any recommendations on Network card makes and models?
How about a Kingston?
Thanks.
Chris.
------------------------------
From: Patrick Colbeck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: DNS Server setup
Date: 26 May 1999 10:54:31 +0100
Hi
Try looking at "split primary dns" you should be able to find it in
the bind faqa along with an example. Basically what you do is have
your primary dns server on the outside of the firewall (it could be at
your ISP if you don't want to run one yourself. This DNS server has
only entries for legel ip addresses ie the stuff that is exposed to
the internet and makes no reference at all to the stuff inside the
firewall.
You then runup another primary dns server inside the firewall (could
actually be the firewall PC itself) but this time it references only
the internal stuff. It is set as a slave of the first dns server.
What happens is if a PC on the internal LAN makes a DNS request and
the internal DNS cant satisfy it from cache or its zone file it then
forwards the request to the outside primary which can then give a
reply from cache or its zone files or at last resort query the root
domoain servers.
I run this system at work and it works like a charm.
Pat
------------------------------
From: Adam Evans <adam@'working-hard'.cje.co.uk>
Subject: Kernel - where from??
Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 10:58:27 +0100
Where is the best place to get the lastest Kernel for my RedHat 5.2 machine?
Also, would a DX2/66 be capable of full internet routing, and samba serving
for a small network? I expect so, it's just I thought the file sharing may
slow it down a bit.
Adam Evans
--
Webmaster and Sales Assistant
CJE, 78 Brighton Road, Worthing, mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
West Sussex, BN11 2EN, England http://www.cje.co.uk/
Tel: +44 (0)1903 523666 Fax: +44 (0)1903 523679
* * * * Any views expressed by me are not necessarily those of CJE * * * *
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
