Linux-Networking Digest #291, Volume #11 Wed, 26 May 99 10:13:42 EDT
Contents:
Re: opening socket in a device (Roberto Lupi)
SO_LINGER setting. How to change? ("Garth Parfitt")
Re: can't telnet to m own machine (Tilman Kranz)
Home phoneline network card driver for linux (root)
Re: FTP over IP-Masquerading (Jan Oosting)
network adapter PB : SMC8000 (Christophe Laurencin)
Re: Hiding a class C between two real class C's. Can it be done? ("Curt")
Re: IP-MASQUERADE results in permanent dialin (Jan Oosting)
SuSE 6.1 and xdialppp problem ("Ron Fodor")
Re: smtp without registered domain? (Duncan Simpson)
Re: @home (Jason Brossa)
Has anyone got net2phone to work behind a firewall? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: NFS with Redhat 6 server and clients (Rich Piotrowski)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roberto Lupi)
Crossposted-To: it.comp.linux.development
Subject: Re: opening socket in a device
Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 13:23:07 +0200
In article <01bea6a4$9d4450e0$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> Hi,
>
> we have big problems with lpd and out HP JetEX print servers that don't
> comunicate a standard way with linux.
>
> The only solution seems to me to write a device driver that talks to the
> JetEX.
>
> Now I have two parts ready:
>
> 1. A skeleton device driver that prints only messages to the console whe in
> open and close teh device.
> 2. The real program that comunicates with the HP JetEX.
> This prog uses the socket and the connect funtion to connect to the
> printserver.
>
> What kernel functions can I use instead of "socket" and "connect" ?
Why do you want it to be a kernel module?
It would be much simpler if you just use /etc/printcap to run an
appropriate script: it should convert the document to be printed from its
current format to the correct format for the HP JetEX and forward it to
the printserver using the program you have already written.
--
Roberto Lupi
IT consultant
Software Developer
------------------------------
From: "Garth Parfitt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: SO_LINGER setting. How to change?
Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 13:37:17 +0200
Can anybody help me to change the time out setting for a Redhat 5.1 mail
server? I'm barking up the SO_LINGER value setting, but I don't understand
how the parameters work. If you could assist me, it would be great.
Thanks
Garth Parfitt
NetConnect
------------------------------
From: Tilman Kranz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: can't telnet to m own machine
Date: 26 May 1999 11:23:59 GMT
marcus holmes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Guys,
> Weird problem here. I can't telnet to my own machine.
not -that- weird ;) It pretty useful not to have telnet open per
default ;). most linuxes seem to have configured telnet access
with porper port, root access denial and "everything" already.
just do a
> man inetd
> man inetd.conf
and also
> man telnetd
to get a raw idea of what is going on. If you can ping the
desired host, there should be no difficulty in using
the desired service.
> Marcus
Greetings, Tilman.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 08:30:12 -0400
From: root <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Home phoneline network card driver for linux
Does anybody know if there is any development going on on Linux drivers
for home phoneline networking cards (ie Linksys, Intel and the likes) ?
-Gilles Leyrat
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jan Oosting)
Subject: Re: FTP over IP-Masquerading
Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 11:02:00 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Kilian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I have installed a linux box (SuSE 6.1, Kernel 2.2.5) which acts as
>gateway between a private network (172.16) and the internet. IP
>Masquerading is simply done with ipchains. Now the Problem: every
>protocol seems to work, except FTP because the PORT-Command always gives
>out the address of the internal machine, which is - of course - refused
>by the remote host. Any suggestions are very welcome.
>
>Thanks in advance
>Kilian
You should be able to see the error messages during network
installation that the masquerading modules could not be found. (Else
you'll have to enable them in /etc/rc.config )
In any case: Suse forgot to include the modules for several
masquerading services. Check the suse website for an update.
www.suse.de or www.suse.com
You can also recompile the kernel, and after that compile and install
the modules for it. Then the masquerading modules will be installed
too. (That's what I did before reading the suse page :)
Greetz,
Jan
------------------------------
From: Christophe Laurencin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.network
Subject: network adapter PB : SMC8000
Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 13:57:31 +0200
Hi there,
I try to setup a SMC-Ultra ethernet card (ISA) on my Redhat 5.1 :
During boot sequence, the ETH0 device is setup as follow :
=========================
May 26 00:14:27 big-one kernel: smc-ultra.c: Presently autoprobing (not
recommended) for a single card.
May 26 00:14:27 big-one kernel: loading device 'eth0'...
May 26 00:14:27 big-one kernel: smc-ultra.c:v2.00 6/6/96 Donald Becker
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
May 26 00:14:27 big-one kernel: eth0: SMC Ultra at 0x300, 00 00 C0 4E 8A
BC, IRQ 10 memory 0xc8000-0xcbfff.
=========================
with base address 0x300.
But when I run ifconfig, here is the result :
=========================
eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:00:C0:4E:8A:BC
inet addr:192.140.140.1 Bcast:192.140.140.255
Mask:255.255.255.0
UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0
TX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0
Interrupt:10 Base address:0x310 Memory:c8000-cc000
=========================
The base address appears to be 0x310 rather than 0x300.
When I use this card on Ms-Dos system, the smc8000.com driver shows me
the address 0x300.
On Linux, it is still impossible to communicate with this adapter !
Does anyone could help me ?
Christophe.
------------------------------
Reply-To: "Curt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "Curt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Hiding a class C between two real class C's. Can it be done?
Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 06:28:49 -0500
You still have a problem with connections initiated from the outside.
(i.e. someone browsing your website)
How will someone find your site if the IP changes, without changes to a DNS
somewhere. That change
would often take 24 hours to propagate through. Probably not very useful.
There should be no problem with internally initiated connections. They
won't know or care either way, since they are going through a NAT.
John Antypas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:nZK23.933$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> OK -- I see I didn't explain what I wanted very well... sorry about that.
>
> What I'm, in effect, trying to do, BGP or similar. In the old days, to
> allow for a reliable network, I'd go to Internic, get my /24 (MY /24) and
> get two providers. I'd then use routing protocols to handle the routing
of
> my /24 onto whichever provider happenned to be better at the time. More
> often that not, it would stay on a given provider "A". However, if
provider
> "A" failed, "B" would take over. A good thing.
>
> Problem is:
>
> - Today, just try to get a portable /24
> - Try to get two providers to route for it
>
> So, what I'd like to do is get TWO providers, each with their own /24
space,
> to handle our "C". True, I could simply switch manually, and renumber all
> hosts, but that gets ugly.
>
> So, if the Cisco has enough horsepower to handle it, I thought I might be
> able to use something like "blind NAT" to do the following:
>
> - Provider "A" provides us a route for /24 100.100.10.*
> - Provider "B" provides us a route for /24 194.12.5.*
> - Our Cisco has a config file active most of the time that says,
"translate
> 100.100.10.x into 10.0.0.x -- nothing more -- a simple IP change in both
> directions"
> - Should we lose provider "A", either automatically, or manaully, the
Cisco
> is told to now translate 194.12.5.* into 10.0.0.x again, by blind NAT.
>
> Sure, it's ugly. But it means I can switch an entire LAN between address
> spaces as needed. The question is:
>
> - I believe the Cisco can do this simple address rewrite. It's not stock
> NAT -- we want both inbound and outbound connections translated, little
> else.
> - If it can, can it handle the workload -- assume a single T-1's
bandwidth.
> (2611 Cisco, IOS 12.0)
>
NAT adds very little overhead.
>
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jan Oosting)
Subject: Re: IP-MASQUERADE results in permanent dialin
Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 12:10:48 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Andreas Hennig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> We have a 3-box local network. One computer acts as local file and
>print Linux-server and is connected to the Internet via ISDN. Squid is
>running on the server. HTTP and FTP from the Non-Sever-boxes (running
>WIN95 and/or Linux)
>is going fine via Netscape and squid, but POP3-accounts are
>unaccessible.
>
>So we have tried to enable internet-access through IP-Masquerading,
>following the
>steps in the IP-Masquerading-HOWTO (the server is running Suse-Linux 6.1
>with
>a 2.2.5 kernel). After a little bit of trial and error, everything is
>running as expected,
>but the server is trying to dial in now nearly every minute, which is
>not that fortunate
>for our telephone-bill (where every call charges at least 0,12DM).
>
>Some futile attempts so far:
>- shutting down Samba
>- shutting down sendmail
>
Since the win9x do keepalive broadcast messages very frequently this
is a main cause of dial-in attempts.
Putting
dns proxy = no
in /etc/smb.conf helped me a lot in preventing unwanted dialing of my
isp. Basically this prevents samba from doing dns lookups if it
doesn't know the ip-translation for a netbios name of one of the other
pcs in the network.
If this doesn't help you could also block the netbios housekeeping
ports (137..139) from being forwarded. I had to do this in my ipfwadm
rules with kernel 2.0.35 , but they don't seem to be needed with
ipchains in 2.2.5
Greetz,
Jan
------------------------------
From: "Ron Fodor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: SuSE 6.1 and xdialppp problem
Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 09:06:26 -0400
SuSE 6.1 and xdialppp
I was able to mount my Windows drive C: and cp the connection log to it as a
text file so now I can give more detail as to what is happening. Connected
but wont talk to mindspring using xdialppp (or anything else that I have
tried).
All help sincerely appreciated....... I am getting to the end of my rope on
Linux because I cant make anything work ie., sound (sound blaster live),
Printer (Lexmark execjet IIc), etc.
Thanks for any advice/guidance. It would really speed things up if I could
get a internet connection so I could search for help on these other problems
without having to kill SuSE and boot Win98.
May 26 08:28:11 localhost kernel: CSLIP: code copyright 1989 Regents of the
University of California
May 26 08:28:11 localhost kernel: PPP: version 2.3.3 (demand dialling)
May 26 08:28:11 localhost kernel: PPP line discipline registered.
May 26 08:28:11 localhost kernel: registered device ppp0
May 26 08:28:11 localhost pppd[379]: pppd 2.3.5 started by root, uid 0
May 26 08:28:12 localhost chat[382]: timeout set to 3 seconds
May 26 08:28:12 localhost chat[382]: abort on (\nBUSY\r)
May 26 08:28:12 localhost chat[382]: abort on (\nNO ANSWER\r)
May 26 08:28:12 localhost chat[382]: abort on (\nRINGING\r\n\r\nRINGING\r)
May 26 08:28:12 localhost chat[382]: send (rAT^M)
May 26 08:28:12 localhost chat[382]: expect (OK)
May 26 08:28:12 localhost chat[382]: rAT^M^F^M
May 26 08:28:12 localhost chat[382]: OK
May 26 08:28:12 localhost chat[382]: -- got it
May 26 08:28:12 localhost chat[382]: send (ATH0^M)
May 26 08:28:12 localhost chat[382]: timeout set to 30 seconds
May 26 08:28:12 localhost chat[382]: expect (OK)
May 26 08:28:12 localhost chat[382]: ^M
May 26 08:28:12 localhost chat[382]: ATH0^M^M
May 26 08:28:12 localhost chat[382]: OK
May 26 08:28:12 localhost chat[382]: -- got it
May 26 08:28:12 localhost chat[382]: send (ATL2DT4042873038^M)
May 26 08:28:13 localhost chat[382]: expect (CONNECT)
May 26 08:28:13 localhost chat[382]: ^M
May 26 08:28:29 localhost chat[382]: ATL2DT4042873038^M^M
May 26 08:28:29 localhost chat[382]: CONNECT
May 26 08:28:29 localhost chat[382]: -- got it
May 26 08:28:29 localhost chat[382]: send (^M)
May 26 08:28:29 localhost chat[382]: expect (netserv)
May 26 08:28:29 localhost chat[382]: 26400^M
May 26 08:28:31 localhost chat[382]: MindSpring Dialup Service^M
May 26 08:28:31 localhost chat[382]: ^M
May 26 08:28:31 localhost chat[382]: netserv
May 26 08:28:31 localhost chat[382]: -- got it
May 26 08:28:31 localhost chat[382]: send ([EMAIL PROTECTED]^M)
May 26 08:28:32 localhost chat[382]: expect (Password:)
May 26 08:28:32 localhost chat[382]: -130.atl2 (s19) login:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]^M
May 26 08:28:32 localhost chat[382]: Password:
May 26 08:28:32 localhost chat[382]: -- got it
May 26 08:28:32 localhost chat[382]: send (abcdefg^M)
May 26 08:28:32 localhost pppd[379]: Serial connection established.
May 26 08:28:33 localhost pppd[379]: Using interface ppp0
May 26 08:28:33 localhost pppd[379]: Connect: ppp0 <--> /dev/modem
May 26 08:28:33 localhost pppd[379]: sent [LCP ConfReq id=0x1 <asyncmap
0xa0000> <magic 0xa1f838d8> <pcomp> <accomp>]
May 26 08:28:33 localhost pppd[379]: rcvd [LCP ConfAck id=0x1 <asyncmap
0xa0000> <magic 0xa1f838d8> <pcomp> <accomp>]
May 26 08:28:35 localhost pppd[379]: rcvd [LCP ConfReq id=0x2 <mru 1500>
<asyncmap 0x0> <magic 0xb5eb588d> <pcomp> <accomp>]
May 26 08:28:35 localhost pppd[379]: sent [LCP ConfAck id=0x2 <mru 1500>
<asyncmap 0x0> <magic 0xb5eb588d> <pcomp> <accomp>]
May 26 08:28:35 localhost pppd[379]: sent [IPCP ConfReq id=0x1 <addr
0.0.0.0>]
May 26 08:28:35 localhost kernel: PPP BSD Compression module registered
May 26 08:28:35 localhost kernel: PPP Deflate Compression module registered
May 26 08:28:35 localhost pppd[379]: sent [CCP ConfReq id=0x1 <deflate 15>
<deflate(old#) 15> <bsd v1 15>]
May 26 08:28:35 localhost pppd[379]: rcvd [IPCP ConfReq id=0x1 <compress VJ
0f 00> <addr 168.121.1.1>]
May 26 08:28:35 localhost pppd[379]: sent [IPCP ConfRej id=0x1 <compress VJ
0f 00>]
May 26 08:28:35 localhost pppd[379]: rcvd [IPCP ConfNak id=0x1 <addr
209.86.53.93>]
May 26 08:28:35 localhost pppd[379]: sent [IPCP ConfReq id=0x2 <addr
209.86.53.93>]
May 26 08:28:35 localhost pppd[379]: rcvd [LCP ProtRej id=0x1 80 fd 01 01 00
0f 1a 04 78 00 18 04 78 00 15 03 2f]
May 26 08:28:35 localhost pppd[379]: rcvd [IPCP ConfReq id=0x2 <compress VJ>
<addr 168.121.1.1>]
May 26 08:28:35 localhost pppd[379]: sent [IPCP ConfRej id=0x2 <compress
VJ>]
May 26 08:28:35 localhost pppd[379]: rcvd [IPCP ConfAck id=0x2 <addr
209.86.53.93>]
May 26 08:28:36 localhost pppd[379]: rcvd [IPCP ConfReq id=0x3 <addr
168.121.1.1>]
May 26 08:28:36 localhost pppd[379]: sent [IPCP ConfAck id=0x3 <addr
168.121.1.1>]
May 26 08:28:36 localhost pppd[379]: local IP address 209.86.53.93
May 26 08:28:36 localhost pppd[379]: remote IP address 168.121.1.1
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Duncan Simpson)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: smtp without registered domain?
Date: 26 May 1999 13:15:15 GMT
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Son Trung Nguyen) writes:
>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
Yes, it will work and I suspect quite a large number of these machines
exist behind firewalls. How other SMTP mailers will find your machine is
a little more difficult if an MX record points the mail elsewhere.
Given this beast has fixed IP and name you can probably presuade at
least some ISPs you to delegate a subdomain to you (or at least give
you an MX and A record). I am sure some of these people would not insist
on selling you a connection as well.
Oh, and finally if do this make sure your machine is in an open relay
for anyone in the world. Such machines are used by spammers to work
around problems, like their machines have been widely backholed and
otherwise blocked so they can not send mail directly. (Cyberpromo
had this problem, if you were around when Spamford was a wanted
spammer).
--
Duncan (-:
"software industry, the: unique industry where selling substandard goods is
legal and you can charge extra for fixing the problems."
------------------------------
From: Jason Brossa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: @home
Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 13:08:19 GMT
Please provide a little more information about your system.
David Moran wrote:
> Iam having problems geting my linux box to connect with the
> @home DHCP server. I have tryed using the DHCPCD -h (user
> id) and it will not connect.
>
> Any help will be apprecated,
> David
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Has anyone got net2phone to work behind a firewall?
Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 09:52:52 -0400
I've tried to use ipautofw but can't get it to work.
I'm using kernel 2.0.33
--
Come Visit Our Website
http://www.freeyellow.com/members/creative-services
Please Visit Our Sponsers (We get paid per visit)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rich Piotrowski)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc,linux.redhat.misc
Subject: Re: NFS with Redhat 6 server and clients
Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 12:15:36 GMT
On Wed, 26 May 1999 14:56:22 +0900, "G. Hugh SONG" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Jon Paterson wrote:
>>
>> I am having a frustrating problem with a Redhat 6 server that was
>> previously a redhat 5.2 server rebuilt.
>>
>> I have a Linux client (redhat 6.0 also) that is trying to connect to the
>> server and is always getting the "permission denied" message.
>>
>> There is nothing wrong with the exports file, I have even deleted it and
>> done the configuration through Linuxconf, and the same error exists.
>>
>> I think that it may have something to do with Knfsd, but am not sure
>> where to look.
>>
>> can anyone help or point me in the right direction?
>>
>> regards,
>>
>> Jon Paterson
>
>I am having the same problem on both systems of Intel/Linux and
>Alpha/Linux. The error message reads as
>
>fh_verify: ///permission failure, acc=3 error=13
>
>and something similar but related to nfs-something.
>
>I guess that it is not related to RedHat6.0. In my case,
>it appears that it is related to the recent kernels, 2.2.8 and
>2.2.9. It appears that it does no harm on the system. But,
>certainly, it makes me quite nervous.
>
>Unfortunately, I don't know more than that.
>
>Regards,
>
>--
>G. Hugh Song
Simple!
Redhat 6.0 NFS now defaults to Read-only. Check your setup in
linuxconf again! Or check man exports. My exports file now loks like
this.
/ machine.name(rw)
Note the addition of the "(rw)" switch to allow read-write.
Rich Piotrowski
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
