Linux-Networking Digest #530, Volume #11 Mon, 14 Jun 99 16:14:29 EDT
Contents:
Re: Problem initializing modem. (TS Stahl)
Re: Help needed with chat (Clifford Kite)
Linux Win98 Networking Problems!! (Rafo)
Re: KPPP Works, IFUP Doesn't (Devlyn)
Re: wu-ftp ("George Georgakis")
Re: Routing through linux ("Andrey Smirnov")
Re: DHCPD and DNS (Hartmann Schaffer)
Terminal Program (Stefan Traber)
Re: ping shows duplicate but only one interface (Kevin Buhr)
Re: netbios over ip-masquerading ("Bernhard Riegel (sdm)")
Re: Can I connect to X from W95? (Lucifer's Rising)
named.conf "option forwarder" vs. resolv.conf "nameserver"? ("Steve Snyder")
Re: PPP Scripting... Help? ("H. Wang")
Re: 3c507 eth0: stop... status 5220 a000 d220 (Drew Geller)
Re: Heeeeelp!!! ("Andrey Smirnov")
Linux as SMB to NCP gateway? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: KPPP Works, IFUP Doesn't (Mohd H Misnan)
Re: ip_masq_icq for kernel 2.0.36 ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
How to interpret tcpdump? ("John Zbesko")
Re: ip_masq_icq for kernel 2.0.36 ("George Georgakis")
NO CARRIER ("newb")
Re: new house wiring (Alex Yung)
Re: Linux & Cybercafe (Etienne Lorrain)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: TS Stahl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.os.linux.dial-up,alt.uu.comp.os.linux.questions,comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Problem initializing modem.
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 1999 09:41:52 -0500
Try setserial and see what you get.
"Troy C. Newman" wrote:
> I currently am running a usr 56k sportster (ISA not winmodem)... The jumpers
> are set a PnP and windows puts it @ com3 irq5... within Linux(RH6) I cannot
> even initialize even though I have tried all four com ports
> (ttys0-ttys3...etc). Can anyone give me some info about where to go from
> here.
--
Scott Stahl
MIS Asst.
Illinois Housing Development Authority
------------------------------
From: kite@NoSpam.%inetport.com (Clifford Kite)
Subject: Re: Help needed with chat
Date: 14 Jun 1999 08:54:53 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
: Hi. I am attempting to connect to my ISP by using the chat command, and I am
: having no luck. Could someone offer me any suggestions?
: I am using the command as follows:
: chat '' ATZ OK ATDT5640322
: Of course, if in the near future I get this much working, I will be adding
: more to the command to do the logon, etc.
Chat was really made to use with pppd. Pppd will supply it with the modem
device file that you specified as a pppd argument, and chat needs to know
which device file to use.
You may be able to play with command line stuff by redirecting standard
output:
chat '' ATZ OK 'ATDTsomenumber;' OK < /dev/modem > /dev/modem
This should dial and then disconnect. You can omit the `;' and it won't
disconnect but then you'll need to use control-c to stop chat. Also don't
assume that /dev/modem is automatically pointed at the device file your
modem actually uses - although if minicom works there's a good chance
that it is a link to the right one.
--
Clifford Kite <kite@inet%port.com> Not a guru. (tm)
/* The signal-to-noise ratio is too low in many [news] groups to make
* them good candidates for archiving.
* --- Mike Moraes, Answers to FAQs about Usenet */
------------------------------
From: Rafo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Linux Win98 Networking Problems!!
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 1999 11:24:30 -0400
Hello:
I am attempting to network a win98 box with a linux system. All I am
trying to do, is to run Apache HTTPD on the Linux box and access it from
the win98 system so I can test CGI scripts.
I am attempting to connect them using ethernet cards. I have assigned
the following IP addresses:
WIN98 IP:192.168.1.110 Mask:255.255.255.0
Linux: IP:192.168.1.100 Mask:255.255.255.0
The linux system boots up with out a problem, it detected the ethernet
hardware ok. I have the hosts file properly structured, netestat looks
ok. At the linux box, when I ping for localhost and for 192.168.1.100
there are no problems, all packet sent are received. However, when I
ping for the win98 system (192.168.1.110) I get no reply. At the win 98
system I can ping both localhost and 192.168.1.110 but I can't ping the
linux box. In other words, the systems are not able to talk at all. I
have connected them using a crossover (NULL) cable as suggested in the
Ethernet-HOWTO.
This has to be a simple problem to fix. Please, someone come to the
rescue!!
Thanks in advance.
RA
------------------------------
From: Devlyn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: KPPP Works, IFUP Doesn't
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 1999 00:08:14 -0700
Mohd H Misnan wrote:
> Have you try using linuxconf to configure your PPP connection? It is quite easy
> to configure PPP using linuxconf and you can then run 'ifup ppp0' either as a
> user or as root.
>
> --
> |Mohd Hamid Misnan | [EMAIL PROTECTED] / [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
> |iMac/233RevB/MacOS 8.6 | [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
> |AMDK6-2/300/Linux2.2.9 | http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/3319/ |
> I tried LSD but I didn't actually swallow.
Yep. That's how I configured it and how I am trying to run the
connection. I used the same info I gave the KPPP config program. I can
get it to authenticate with a script but, not with PAP. PAP
authentication is necessary for multilinking the two ISDN channels. I
can only get it to do that with KPPP. So, KPPP is feeding PPPD
something different to bring up the connection.
Thanks for the suggestion.
Dev
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "George Georgakis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: wu-ftp
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 1999 06:05:47 GMT
Your /etc/ftpaccess file dictates which users can do what.
George
===========================================================================
I never reply by email as a) I don't give out my real email address freely,
and b) it stops other NG users from reading the solutions to problems
If necessary, however, I can be contacted thru geegs (a) linuxstart DOT com
==========================================================================
David Bell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in article
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> I am trying to get wu-ftp work but am having problems. I can log-in and
> download files but cannot upload any. How do I fix this? Or does anyone
> recommend any other ftp servers that might be easier for a newbie to use.
>
> -------------------------
> David Bell
>
> Please don't email me just reply on the board.
>
------------------------------
From: "Andrey Smirnov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Routing through linux
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 1999 23:00:54 -0700
Hello,
Unless you have a switch capable of working in VLAN mode, you can't put two
machines with different addresses on the same network.
Why don't you put your second machine with a private IP on local network and
use port forwarding?
Good luck!
Carl Filpo wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>I have a linux box (Debian 2.1) set up as a mail server/gateway with a
>permanent
>dialup to an ISP with a static IP. eg. 203.x.x.x for agument sake.
>
>It runs IP masquerading so the computers on the LAN all have addresses
>192.168.0.x
>
>I need to set up another box - a web server on the local network with
>another
>"real" static IP.
>
>What I'm not sure about is how t oroute from the gateway mentioned above
>(203.x.x.x) to the web server (203.x.x.y) on the local lan.
>
>Questions:
>
>1. What command must I give to route from the gateway to the web server ?
> How about: route add 203.x.x.y in the rc script ??
>
>2. Does the web server need to have 2 ip addresses ( 1 for the 192.168.0.x
>and 1 for the real ip ) ??
> Or will it be fine with a real IP on the local net of 192.168.0 ?
>
>3. If I set the ISP's DNS as:
>
>domainname.com 203.x.x.x
>www .domainname.com 203.x.x.y
>
>will the static route I set up from (1) allow traffic through to the www
>site from the gateway (domainname.com) ?
>
>Does the ISP have to have anything special in their routing config for
>Internet nodes to access the web server given
>that the only direct connection is through 203.x.x.x - does the www entry
>have to point to 203.x.x.x or 203.x.x.y ??
>
>
>--
>Carl Filpo
>Computer Network Consultant
>
>=================================================
>Carl Filpo BSc(Curtin)
>Computer Network Consultant
>
>C&M Computer Solutions
>26 Russell St
>MORLEY WA 6062
>
>Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Phone: +61 08 9375 1144
>Fax: +61 08 9375 1141
>Mobile: 0407 396 316
>
>=================================================
>
>
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Hartmann Schaffer)
Subject: Re: DHCPD and DNS
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 1999 16:43:44 GMT
In article <OG993.161$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Carl D. Blake" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I have a linux system which is acting as a DHCP server in a network with
> several Windows 95/NT machines. I would like all the machines to be able to
> access each other over TCP/IP by their host names. I would like to do this
> without having to maintain a hosts and lmhosts on each Windows machine.
> Also, since the DHCP server is assigning IP addresses dynamically to each
> Windows machine, how can I make it so that the linux system can resolve the
> name of each local machine to an IP address? I've read the DHCP HOW-TO and
> I couldn't find a solution there. Any ideas?
Check out the dhcpd related man pages (I looked at them a while ago for
a similar problem): you can configure dhcpd to assign IP addresses based
on a couple of criteria. Afair, the etbernet address of the requestor
was one possible criterion.
Hartmann Schaffer
------------------------------
From: Stefan Traber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Terminal Program
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 1999 18:20:41 +0200
Hello,
i'm looking for a terminal program for Linux which is scriptable (like
Telix for Windows).
Thanks for any help.
Regards,
Stefan Traber.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kevin Buhr)
Subject: Re: ping shows duplicate but only one interface
Date: 14 Jun 1999 12:15:37 -0500
Harry Park <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> in our AIX server environment. All has been running well for
> months. I happened to ping the IP of the LINUX box from AIX and
> recieved a message showing the IP was a duplicate and the 2 response
> times. If I pull the cable on the LINUX box and ping the IP it does
> not exist. The LINUX environment has not changed in months, AIX is
> at 4.31.
One possibility is a misconfigured local network, gateway, or netmask
on one machine or the other.
Imagine the following scenario: the AIX network card is in promiscuous
mode for some reason, and the Linux machine has an incorrect local
network number. Linux wants to send an ICMP echo reply to AIX, but it
incorrectly determines that the destination is not local (because of
its incorrectly configured local network number). Therefore, it sends
the packet to your Cisco gateway. More precisely, it sends a packet
with Ethernet destination "Cisco gateway" but IP destination "AIX".
The AIX network card, in promiscuous mode, picks up this packet,
ignores the Ethernet destination, and sees that the IP destination is
itself, so it registers a "ping" response. The gateway, a Cisco
router that cares more about Ethernet addresses than IP addresses,
sees that it's been sent a packet destined for AIX, and it reforwards
it to AIX, which registers a second "ping" response.
Conversely, if the AIX machine is misconfigured and the Linux machine
is in promiscuous mode, the AIX machine would send an echo request to
the gateway, eliciting the first response from Linux, and the gateway
would resend the echo request to Linux, eliciting a second response
from Linux.
I've had exactly this situation occur, but with a misconfigured
Windows machines that thought its netmask was "255.255.255.127"
instead of "255.255.255.128" (that is, just about every address was
believed to be non-local). It forwarded all "local" traffic to a
Cisco gateway which, for whatever reason, forwarded it back out the
same interface. Everything operated normally (though inefficiently,
since all traffic in one direction was duplicated): we only noticed
the problem when the gateway crashed and the Windows machine stopped
communicating with local machines.
How do you troubleshoot this rat's nest? Run "tcpdump -e" (where the
"-e" prints out Ethernet addresses) on a third machine during one of
these "ping" sessions, and draw a diagram to try to sort out what's
going on.
Kevin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: "Bernhard Riegel (sdm)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.networking.tcp-ip
Subject: Re: netbios over ip-masquerading
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 1999 08:33:22 +0200
IP-masquerading, NT domains and PDC can not be seperated in my setup, as
I want to use them together.
My goal is to extend the IP-address room of a LAN using a linux router
with IP-masquerading and NT clients with IPs of the private range behind
that linux box which can connect to the other NT clients in the LAN with
all network services available. I am not concerned with an internet
access, as this is already done by other machines in the LAN.
Unfortunately the forwarding does not work for broadcasts as broadcasts
are generally not routed. So sending unknown addresses to the gateway
only works with a non-broadcast IP address. But the domain logon for
Windows NT over netbios uses broadcasts on the client and the server.
The client broadcast can be avoided by a lmhosts file containing the IP
of the PDC. But the server broadcasts can't (in a reasonable setup).
Using netbios in subnets requires computers that can do netbios services
in each subnet. Especially you need a local master browser to collect
the information of available netbios servers and their shares. The
master browsers of the subnets must know each others IP address. This
can be done by using lmhosts or WINS.
In my special case samba will do that work. Therefore I will setup samba
as a local master browser on my linux box. The linux router will also
become the local master browser, which collects the netbios services and
contacts the PDC as well as the domain master browser and everything
should work (if I have figured out the correct samba setup ...).
Bernhard
Raymonds Doetjes wrote:
>
> You mix up a few things here.
> IP-masq, NT Domains and PDC's are all seperate.
>
> They only thing that you have to do, is to supply your internet clients
> with the default gateway address of your Linux box. f.i. 192.168.0.1 if
> this is your Linux box's IP address. The Linux box will then forward (if ip
> forwarding is enabled) those calls to f.i. 24.1.34.211 (that is your ppp
> address given to you from your ISP).
> Now every client will fiorwrd unkown network addresses to the Linuxbox that
> wil deside to masq it and send it to the net.
>
> LINUX AND IP-MASQ RULES
>
> Raymond
>
> "Bernhard Riegel (sdm)" wrote:
>
> > did anyone tried to extend the available IP adresses in a winNT domain
> > using private IP addresses (such as 192.168.0.x) connected to the
> > official addresses via a linux router and ip-masquerading? (Multiple
> > winNT clients would appear with the same IP address). If so, how can a
> > winNT client become member of a winNT domain and be registered at the
> > PDC?
> >
> > bernhard
> >
> > _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
> > Bernhard Riegel mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
Bernhard Riegel mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
sd&m GmbH & Co. KG http://www.sdm.de
software design & management
Thomas-Dehler-Str. 27, 81737 Muenchen, Germany
Tel +49 89 63812-736 Fax -150
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Lucifer's Rising)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.x
Subject: Re: Can I connect to X from W95?
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 1999 22:46:37 GMT
On Sat, 12 Jun 1999 23:17:19 +0100, Michel van der Kleij
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>W95-machine :(
>>Anyone who knows where to find this particular program on the 'net?
>
Check out this site. I came across it last year, it's for a program
called XVNC. Runs an nice X/Win session from a linux server to a Win
box. And it's free.
http://www.uk.research.att.com/cgi-bin/vncform
Dom
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ("Steve Snyder")
Crossposted-To: comp.protocols.dns.bind
Subject: named.conf "option forwarder" vs. resolv.conf "nameserver"?
Date: 14 Jun 1999 12:44:54 -0700
Can someone explain to this DNS/BIND newbie the functional distinction
between the "options forwarder" in named.conf and the "nameserver" in
resolv.conf?
To me, they sound like they act identically: if a name cannot be resolved
locally, the specified remote host is called upon to do the resolution.
I currently have my RedHat v6.0 system (/w BIND v8.2) configured with the
addresses of 2 nameservers in /etc/named.conf. If a name can't be resolved
from my local cache, the request for resolution is forwarded to either the
primary or secondary nameserver of my ISP, both listed in /etc/resolv.conf.
I'm wondering, though, if there would be any advantage in having the
addresses of those nameservers in "options forward" statements. Would
there?
Thank you.
***** Steve Snyder *****
------------------------------
From: "H. Wang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.os.linux.dial-up,alt.uu.comp.os.linux.questions,comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: PPP Scripting... Help?
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 1999 14:48:24 -0400
Are you using PPP? If yes, look at /etc/ppp/ppp-on and
/etc/ppp/ppp-on-dialer. The latter is the dial-up script. You have to
manully dial your isp and see if the script fits your situation. Look at
/var/log/messages to find out if there is anything wrong. You may also
have to set up your resolv.conf to let your computer look up host names
from your isp's dns. Read PPP-HOWTO.
Troy C. Newman wrote:
>
> I finally got my modem working and am currently trying to configure my
> dial-up connection... I've played a little with the commands and have
> dialed the isp but then nothing... is there a way to find out what the
> script should say/do to establish and maintain the connection or is it a
> matter of trial and error for different isp's.
>
> any help would be greatly appreciated...tcn.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Drew Geller)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: Re: 3c507 eth0: stop... status 5220 a000 d220
Date: 14 Jun 1999 18:36:51 GMT
I've got a 486dx2 with RH 5.1, kernel v. 2.0.34, the driver compiled
into the kernel; and I have exactly the same problem (except mine
never worked right).
Please let me know if you find out anything.
Drew
__
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Andrey Smirnov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Heeeeelp!!!
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 1999 23:31:23 -0700
Hello,
If your ISP provides you with dynamic IP then you need to setup your eth1
(connected to the DSL bridge) to use dhcp client software instead of static
address. And it will be a 'real' Internet address.
As far as default gateway, you need to ask your ISP what that is, also it
could be assigned with DHCP data, so you can run netstat -rn to get it.
Also if you have a Windows machine working connected directly to DSL
modem/bridge, then just get all the info of that machine using 'winipcfg'
command.
Good luck!
Richi wrote in message ...
>Surely someone out there has been able to make this work. I am having a
>terrible time getting my DSL to work on my Linux box.
>
>If someone can tell me how to set it up, I will be forever grateful....
>
>I had the machine working as a dial up IP masquerading machine and it
worked
>great.
>
>I now have ADSL and I cant seem to figure out how to set it up
>
>The machine is a Mandrake 5.3 box with two ethernet cards.
>
>I have my subnet on the LAN set to 255.255.255.0
>
>My windows machines are 10.0.0.11 and 10.0.0.12.
>
>I assigned the LAN (ETH0)card in the linux box 10.0.0.10 and the DSL router
>(ETH1)card 10.0.0.99.
>
>One thing I noticed was only one ethernet card worked when they were on the
>same subnet. As a matter of fact whichever card initialized first, was the
>one that worked. I changed the subnet on the DSL card and then they both
>worked.
>
>Anyway I am on a USWest dynamic assigned service.
>
>Can anyone tell me what values to assign the DSL NIC ? And what info to use
>in my routing.
>
>Is there anything that would need changed in the router that would be
>different from Windows ?
>
>Many thanks in advance.
>
>Rich
>
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Linux as SMB to NCP gateway?
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 1999 17:12:37 GMT
I has some files (a Foxpro for DOS database) that reside on an NT
server. I also have one oddball client workstation that must run a
Novell-specific app to communicate with that database. The rest of the
30-some-odd client workstations run an different app that talks to those
database files just fine over NT's smb filesharing. The problematic app
shells out to DOS and executes some Novell commands (map root, login,
etc....), hence it won't work in a pure smb filesharing environment. It
cannot be rewritten either as it's closed-source. I do have a copy of
Netware 3.12, but I don't really want to put the entire database on a
netware server, since I've got a good backup solution already in place
and the other clients work fine. Could I install mars_nwe (& the
netware system files so that novell commands will work) on a Linux box,
smbmount the NT's shared foxpro database directory, and then re-share
via NCP that smbmounted directory/files to the single oddball client so
it can do shell out to DOS to do it's novell-thang and have everything
work all hunky-dory? Anybody out there ever do this before: re-share via
mars_nwe(NCP) something that is smbmounted from another server and get
away with it without any data corruption or file locking problems?
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mohd H Misnan)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: KPPP Works, IFUP Doesn't
Date: 14 Jun 1999 06:27:48 GMT
On Sun, 13 Jun 1999 19:58:25 -0700, Devlyn wrote:
>Greetings,
>
>I'm running Linux Mandrake 6.0, trying to build a router that dials up
>via ISDN to an ISP. I was able to make it go on the first try with KPPP
>- including PAP authentication and multilink.
>
>I'm having a hard time getting it to work with IFUP, though. It just
>won't authenticate using PAP. I've read the PPP-HOWTO and the "How to
>Connect to an ISP" HOWTO and a pile of other stuff. Since KPPP is using
>the same pppd, I'm assuming that the problem is with what's being fed to
>pppd (scripts?)
>
>I need to be able to setup dial-on-demand. Is there a way to do that
>with KPPP or is there a way to access the KPPP script from the shell to
>establish the connection? Or?
Have you try using linuxconf to configure your PPP connection? It is quite easy
to configure PPP using linuxconf and you can then run 'ifup ppp0' either as a
user or as root.
--
|Mohd Hamid Misnan | [EMAIL PROTECTED] / [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
|iMac/233RevB/MacOS 8.6 | [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
|AMDK6-2/300/Linux2.2.9 | http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/3319/ |
I tried LSD but I didn't actually swallow.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: ip_masq_icq for kernel 2.0.36
Date: 14 Jun 1999 15:27:31 +0800
No.. ICQ need a UDP port on 4000 to listen to, so either SOCKS5 or an ICQ
Masq Module is required.
Mr. Poet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Marcel Lemmen wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I'm lookin' for the module called ip_masq_icq.o for kernel version
>> 2.0.36
> ICQ doesn't need a MASQ module
> ------------------ Posted via SearchLinux ------------------
> http://www.searchlinux.com
------------------------------
From: "John Zbesko" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: How to interpret tcpdump?
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 1999 14:15:59 -0500
I'm having problems between an old IBM Model 80 running DOS 6.2 and MSClient
and my Samba-Linux server. Seems that I can do everything but copy large
(100KB) files from the DOS client to the server. The DOS box hangs. How do I
interpret the following tcpdump lines?
21:29:16.017440 old386.33355 > zbesko.linux.netbios-ssn: P 919:1000(81) ack
2111995156 win 1024
21:29:16.035709 zbesko.linux.netbios-ssn > old386.33355: . ack 81 win 31744
(DF)
Where can I find documentation on what these lines are saying? Thanks for
your help.
John Zbesko
------------------------------
From: "George Georgakis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: ip_masq_icq for kernel 2.0.36
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 1999 08:24:00 GMT
If ICQ is supposed to need a masq module, then why does it work perfectly
through my 2.0.32 gateway without one?
George
===========================================================================
I never reply by email as a) I don't give out my real email address freely,
and b) it stops other NG users from reading the solutions to problems
If necessary, however, I can be contacted thru geegs (a) linuxstart DOT com
==========================================================================
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in article <7k2at3$e22$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> No.. ICQ need a UDP port on 4000 to listen to, so either SOCKS5 or an ICQ
> Masq Module is required.
>
> Mr. Poet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Marcel Lemmen wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> I'm lookin' for the module called ip_masq_icq.o for kernel version
> >> 2.0.36
>
> > ICQ doesn't need a MASQ module
>
> > ------------------ Posted via SearchLinux ------------------
> > http://www.searchlinux.com
>
------------------------------
From: "newb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: NO CARRIER
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 1999 19:14:36 GMT
I can connect to my ISP(gte.net) but after awhile(around 2 min) my modem
hangs up giving me NO CARRIER message.
My ISP was able to give me an IP. I'm using minicom to dial and every
configuration was done in X environment. BTW, how do I know if I have named
running and ppp running. Do I need this in order to connect. I know what's
it mean by those two(named and ppp) at least in theory. I have pppd running,
is this ppp service? Are ppp and pppd the same?
TIA
Leon
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Alex Yung)
Subject: Re: new house wiring
Date: 14 Jun 1999 18:29:13 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
blah ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: I am in the process of building a house. I just wanted some suggestions on
: the best way to wire for the future. Any help would be appreciated.
It is difficult to predict what types of wire will be common or
popular in the future. Presumbly, you don't mind the additional cost.
You should ask your electrical contractor to put an 1 - 1.5 inches
individual conduit from each room to the attic or basement of your
new home and leave you the fish wire on each conduit. In this case,
you can decide the cable type and your server room at a later time.
You can run a lots of cable with this setup. I used 1/2" conduit in
my house. It is a little too small for my need.
------------------------------
From: Etienne Lorrain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.uu.comp.os.linux.questions,comp.os.linux.development.system
Subject: Re: Linux & Cybercafe
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 1999 09:47:23 +0100
There is also, somewhere, a "restricted" shell, I do not
remember its name - but it could be "rsh", and there is a
name clash with the "remote" shell "rsh".
With it, the user can do "ls" but nothing more... mostly
not "chsh".
Etienne.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
