Linux-Networking Digest #613, Volume #11 Tue, 22 Jun 99 00:13:41 EDT
Contents:
Re: Win98 Machine Connected Via Modem, Linux Needs Connection..help!!!! (Ken Cormack)
Re: Linux Win98 Networking Problems!! ("Brendan O'Neill")
patch panels ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: SuSE Linux 6.1 & PPPIOCGUNIT Operation not permitted (Malware)
Re: Help in planning network ("David Means")
Missing new_tunnel with kernel 2.2 ("Pic")
Re: DHCPD server Error ("Peter Treloar")
How to define webspace? ("craigw")
Oversized Ethernet Frames? HELP! (root)
Re: Vpn Question (Ian Cottrell)
Re: Linux-Windows network setup (Donald naismith)
Re: mgetty for dial-in blocks outgoing traffic (M. Buchenrieder)
Re: cable modem or ASDL (Brad Clawsie)
Setting up Linux to share PPP connection... (Ken J Braatz)
Re: Loading modules at boot (Donald naismith)
How to setup Netscape under Xwindow? ("Bulks")
Re: patch panels (Frank Sweetser)
Re: Please help: win98 and linux=headache ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux Firewalling/Multiple Ethernet Question ("David Means")
Re: Linux Firewalling/Multiple Ethernet Question (bill davidsen)
TCI@HOME with linux (Jan Fure)
Re: cable modem or ASDL (bryan)
wvdial w/ redhat doesn't like ibm.net (Rim Vilgalys)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ken Cormack)
Subject: Re: Win98 Machine Connected Via Modem, Linux Needs Connection..help!!!!
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 00:31:05 GMT
On Mon, 21 Jun 1999 23:36:38 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>[D] [R] [O] [Z] wrote:
>
>> Hi Guys,
>> I have a Win98 machine with a cable modem, internal. I want to be
>> able to use linux thu the win98 machine. I have both computers on a
>> 5-port hub, they both ping each other, however, how do i get to use
>> Linux thru the 98 machine, now here is my wish.. I would like to use
>> all the shell utilities, i know x-windows is the thing, but i want to
>> be able to use the other stuff in the shell, like lynx, telnet, etc...
>> is this possible??? Any help can and will be much appreciated..
>> -Nick
>
>*ponder* I don't think it can be accomplished through Win9X. It can be
>done with NT I know, using the RAS and a private network. I'm not that
>familiar with 98 so I'm not totally sure. The problem lies in the fact
>that win9x wasn't really designed to be server OS, and is peer-to-peer,
>or a client.
>
>There might be some software out there (ie WinGate) that might help,
>though. Good luck in your efforts.
>
>Ryan
Another option to investigate (if you care to spend the money) is the
new Windows 98 "Second Edition", that was just released on June 10th.
Kind of like OSR2 was to Windows 95, the "Second Edition" version of
98 is supposed to add some new features to 98. One of them is
peer-to-peer modem-sharing like WinGate, I would think, but I dont
know all of the particulars since I havent played with "Second
Edition" yet. I would ask around first, to see if anyone could give
you more specific info about its abilities and limitations.
I saw it retailing for $79 U.S. for the upgrade version, and $179 U.S.
for the "no previous version of Windows required" version. I'm sure
those were full list prices, and you could probably do better at the
discounters.
------------------------------
From: "Brendan O'Neill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux Win98 Networking Problems!!
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 11:32:42 +1000
hi,
I had exactly the same problem.
I was using an SMC ehternet card. I swapped it with a 3com card and the
problem remained, but the 3com card allowed me to disable shared memory.
Once I did this, it worked fine.
Good Luck
Brendan
Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Rafo wrote:
>
> > 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
>
> hello,
> have you tried going into network icon in control panel(on win98box)
> clicking on file and printer sharing and checking both boxes???? then have
> to hit ok and then ok again and click yes to restart.
> i fought that on my linux/win98 hybrid network until it dawned on me three
> hours later, also make sure hard drive on win98 is shared.
> if this doesnt work i have another idea. so email me back if it doesnt
> work...
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: patch panels
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 00:17:38 GMT
I am designing a network for a dorm-style building with a linux box
router running dhcp. My plan is to run 24 cat5 cables into hubs, run
the hubs up to a 10 port switch, and the switch into an amd450 router.
While I was designing the network I realized that I wasn't planning on
using any patch panels, as they seemed rather pointless. Do they serve
any purpose? What are the pros/cons of stranded vs solid cable? Is the
solid much thinner, harder to install, and unable to take 90degree turns
as I have read in various places? Does the overall design have any
obvious flaws?
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
------------------------------
From: Malware <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: uk.comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: SuSE Linux 6.1 & PPPIOCGUNIT Operation not permitted
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 01:29:28 +0200
Hi Peter,
you wrote:
> But now looka here, something else is a-foot!
[...]
> Jun 20 22:48:04 xenonsoft pppd[451]: sent [IPCP ConfReq id=0x3 <addr
> 192.237.75.1> <compress VJ 0f 01>]
> Jun 20 22:48:04 xenonsoft pppd[451]: rcvd [IPCP ConfNak id=0x3 <addr
> 193.237.75.1>]
> Jun 20 22:48:04 xenonsoft pppd[451]: sent [IPCP ConfReq id=0x4 <addr
> 192.237.75.1> <compress VJ 0f 01>]
Why do you insist on getting assigned the address 192.237.75.1 while the
peer does offer you 193.237.75.1? Looks like a typo within the config
file.
Malware
------------------------------
From: "David Means" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.linux,comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.questions,comp.os.linux.setup,hk.comp.os.linux,it.comp.linux,it.comp.linux.setup,linux.redhat.install
Subject: Re: Help in planning network
Date: 22 Jun 1999 01:58:30 GMT
Benzene Ring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:7klqkp$o8q$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I am a new user of RedHat 5.2. I want to config a LAN which one of them
will
> connect to the Internet. Is the machine need to set as router or proxy
> server?
> I am using RedHat, does the graphical configuration tools do everything I
> need for my network? If not, how can I do for it?
> How to start the network?
> IP for each machine: 192.168.0.*
> Netmask: 255.255.255.0
> ( the one with ppp to the Internet have IP of 192.168.0.1 and host name
of:
> comp1, it is the gateway)
>
I would recommend starting with /usr/doc/HOWTO/NET-3-HOWTO,
and then going on to /usr/doc/HOWTO/DNS-HOWTO.
------------------------------
From: "Pic" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Missing new_tunnel with kernel 2.2
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 21:56:45 -0400
Hi,
I have been using ip tunnelling successfully with kernel
2.0.34 using modules ipip.o and new_tunnel.o
I can't make it work with kernel 2.2.6, I have noticed that
module new_tunnel.o is not present in the kernel source.
Has support for ip tunnelling been dropped with kernel 2.2.x?
Regards
Pic
------------------------------
From: "Peter Treloar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: DHCPD server Error
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 19:51:23 -0600
Thanks for the help.
It seems there was a typo in my rc.local file. I noticed it when I was
comparing your response to what I had.
Thanks,
Peter.
Andrey Smirnov wrote in message
<7kjt67$5am$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>What kind of dhcp clients do you have?
>
>If clients are windows based, then you need to add a route on your Linux
>dhcp server:
>
>route add -host 255.255.255.255 dev eth0
>
>Good luck!
>
>Peter Treloar wrote in message <7kjkf9$gsp$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>>I have dhcpd setup with the following dhcpd.conf :
>>
>>>subnet 192.168.10.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 {
>>> range 192.168.10.20 192.168.10.200;
>>> default-lease-time 600; max-lease-time 7200;
>>> option subnet-mask 255.255.255.0;
>>> option broadcast-address 192.168.10.255;
>>> option routers 192.168.10.1;
>>> option domain-name-servers 206.75.216.200,206.75.216.210;
>>> }
>>>
>>
>>
>>and I get the following errors when I run "/usr/sbin/dhcpd -d -f eth0"
>>
>>>Internet Software Consortium DHCPD $Name: V2-BETA-1-PATCHLEVEL-6 $
>>>Copyright 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998 The Internet Software Consortium.
>>>All rights reserved.
>>>Listening on Socket/eth0/192.168.10.0
>>>Sending on Socket/eth0/192.168.10.0
>>>DHCPDISCOVER from 00:20:af:1e:d5:fd via eth0
>>>DHCPOFFER on 192.168.10.22 to 00:20:af:1e:d5:fd via eth0
>>>sendpkt: Network is unreachable
>>>DHCPDISCOVER from 00:20:af:1e:d5:fd via eth0
>>>DHCPOFFER on 192.168.10.22 to 00:20:af:1e:d5:fd via eth0
>>>sendpkt: Network is unreachable
>>
>>I'm running Red Hat Linux release 5.2 (Apollo) Kernel 2.0.36 on an i486
>with
>>2 network cards. One connected to a cable modem connected to the internet.
>>IP masquerading is working when I hardcode the addresses on the clients.
>>
>>The ipfwadm commands are:
>>
>>>ipfwadm -F -f
>>>ipfwadm -I -a accept -S 0/0 67 -W bootp_clients_net_if_name -P udp
>>>ipfwadm -F -p deny
>>>ipfwadm -F -a m -S 192.168.10.0/24 -D 0.0.0.0/0
>>
>>Any help would be greatly appreciated.
>>
>>
>>Peter.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
------------------------------
From: "craigw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: How to define webspace?
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 09:06:22 +0900
I'm just learning how to administrate a web server properly. How do you
define how much web space each individual user gets?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (root)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: Oversized Ethernet Frames? HELP!
Date: 22 Jun 1999 10:31:31 +0800
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hello, ladies and gentlemen:
I am running a private networking line between two computers.
One is a dual PII/400, Red Hat Linux 5.2, with soft raid set up as my
server. The other is a dual PII/333, tweaked quite a bit, with 256MB
of main memory and two 4GB SCSI-UW drives on an AHA-2940UW controller
and both boxen are connected to a BNC network with coaxials (one with
a D-Link 530CT, the other with a D-Link 220 ISA card). Server has a
3C905b as eth1; client side (the PII/333s) has a VIA-Rhine D-Link.
I should mention that transmission is apparently normal: data
is moved across my twisted CAT-5 at a rate that is several times more
than what a 10Mbps coax can do, although far short of the 10+ MB/s of
the optimal value. But what makes be nervous is this ...
Can anyone shed any light for me?
eth1: Oversized Ethernet frame c00990c0 vs c00990c0.
eth1: Oversized Ethernet frame spanned multiple buffers, entry 0x68b6 length 0 s
tatus 0600!
eth1: Oversized Ethernet frame c0099060 vs c0099060.
eth1: Oversized Ethernet frame spanned multiple buffers, entry 0x68b7 length 0 s
tatus 0400!
eth1: Oversized Ethernet frame c0099070 vs c0099070.
eth1: Oversized Ethernet frame spanned multiple buffers, entry 0x68b8 length 151
8 status 8d00!
eth1: Oversized Ethernet frame c0099080 vs c0099080.
eth1: Oversized Ethernet frame spanned multiple buffers, entry 0x6971 length 0 s
tatus 0600!
eth1: Oversized Ethernet frame c0099010 vs c0099010.
eth1: Oversized Ethernet frame spanned multiple buffers, entry 0x6972 length 0 s
tatus 0400!
eth1: Oversized Ethernet frame c0099020 vs c0099020.
eth1: Oversized Ethernet frame spanned multiple buffers, entry 0x6973 length 151
8 status 8d00!
eth1: Oversized Ethernet frame c0099030 vs c0099030.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ian Cottrell)
Subject: Re: Vpn Question
Date: 22 Jun 1999 01:52:51 GMT
Chris McGarry ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: I have 4 remote private networks. Each network has an ADSL (static ip)
: connected to a Linux box (RedHat ver 6 kernel 2.2) running a firewall
: and IP Masquerading for access to the internet for each of the networks.
: I'd like to setup a VPN between these networks and of coarse a free
: package would be nice : ) . Needs to run on kernel 2.2 486 - Pent 120,
: and a common package for support resource issues would be a plus. Does
: anyone have any recommendations?
: Thanks for your time,
: Chris
Take a look at Free SWAN (free secure wide area network) at:
http://www.xs4all.nl/~freeswan/
I can't really comment on it, since I just started looking at it today,
but is should do what you want...................Ian
--
============================================================================
Ian Cottrell office email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Chief, Internet Services personal email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Department of Justice office: (613) 941-5233
284 Wellington Street
Ottawa, ON, Canada
============================================================================
------------------------------
From: Donald naismith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux-Windows network setup
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 22:06:40 -0400
The How-to are a great resource. You may also want to try - Linux Network
Toolkit from IDG books. It's a great step by step resource for exactly
what you're doing. I tend to use the How-To, but found this book sometime
ago and thought it gave the beginner a clear no non-sense approach to
setting up a simple Linux network.
Dale Walker wrote:
> I'm experienced with Windows networking using TCP/IP and have just
> cobbled together a spare PC to learn about Linux. I've had a bit of
> experience with UNIX but not in setting anything up.
>
> I'm trying to network a Windows 98 based PC with the Linux one but I
> need a bit of guidance on how to do this. I've got an NE2000 based NIC
> in each machine and a crossover patch cable between them so I think
> I've got the right hardware. On the Windows side I have an IP address
> of 192.168.0.2, a host name of WinPC and a domain name of 'net'.
>
> What's the simplest test to see if the NIC cards and cable is
> functioning correctly?
>
> Assuming I want the Linux machine to be called LinuxPC and have an IP
> address of 192.168.0.1, what do I do next?
>
> What else do I need to do to get both machines to talk to each other
> with the Linux machine as the server? I'll probably want to access
> both machines from each other, at least for a while. I've a feeling
> Samba might come in handy. How do you set that up? I'll probably need
> to work my way through an Apache setup as well.
>
> Any hints, help or directions in finding decent tutorials on Win-Linux
> networking, Samba or Apache would be greatly appreciated.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> | Dale Walker London Techno Events |
> | [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
> | London, UK http://www.sorted.org/london |
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (M. Buchenrieder)
Subject: Re: mgetty for dial-in blocks outgoing traffic
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 21:39:23 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[...]
>Unfortunately, using mgetty for incoming calls has blown out my outgoing
>ppp capability. I get the message that the system lacks kernel support
>for ppp.
[...]
See mgetty manpages and info files. Your programs must agree
on the location and type of the lockfiles created. Add the "lock"
option to the pppd invocation.
Michael
--
Michael Buchenrieder * [EMAIL PROTECTED] * http://www.muc.de/~mibu
Lumber Cartel Unit #456 (TINLC) & Official Netscum
Note: If you want me to send you email, don't munge your address.
------------------------------
From: Brad Clawsie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: cable modem or ASDL
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 01:48:31 GMT
I have had both.
I dropped cable modem (like everyone else I know who has had it) due to
high packet loss and general flakiness.
My DSL solution is without a doubt far better.
>From what I have heard my cable modem experience is not unique - I
expect cable modems to go out of vogue as fast as they came in - they
appear to flake out way too much given their high cost.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
------------------------------
From: Ken J Braatz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux.mandrake
Subject: Setting up Linux to share PPP connection...
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 19:08:42 -0400
I would like to setup my Linux box to route traffic from my PPP
connection to my ISP to other boxes on my home network. I've made a few
attempts using what documentation I've been able to find but have been
unsuccessful. I have no problems connecting the Linux box to my ISP
(Netcom) and have no problems connecting my other WinTel boxes to the
Linux box. They just won't route.
Here's what I have running:
Mandrake 6.0 (2.2.9-27 kernel) - Full installation with nothing special
configured.
PPP connection to Netcom that is issued a dynamic IP and router address.
Ethernet IP address of 192.168.100.1
The wintel boxes are all on the same subnet (192.168.100) with a default
gateway set to 192.168.100.1.
What I would ultimately like to do is setup a script that, if possible,
would, automatically open the PPP connection if it isn't already up and
then close it after a period of inactivity. For now I''d just be happy
getting it to route period though.
Any pointers would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks
--
Ken Braatz
The "-x" in my address is a spam killer. Remove it to respond via email.
------------------------------
From: Donald naismith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: uk.comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.admin
Subject: Re: Loading modules at boot
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 23:40:51 -0400
edit /etc/conf.modules
add the following
alias eth1 tulip
Albert Want wrote:
> I've installed a second ethernet card on my PC but, since it's a tulip
> adapter, at the startup it fails because the module is not loaded.
>
> How to load modules at start-up in RedHat 6.0 ?
>
> Thanks in advance
------------------------------
From: "Bulks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: How to setup Netscape under Xwindow?
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 11:12:17 +0800
AS title,
Thanks
------------------------------
From: Frank Sweetser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: patch panels
Date: 21 Jun 1999 22:19:28 -0400
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> I am designing a network for a dorm-style building with a linux box
> router running dhcp. My plan is to run 24 cat5 cables into hubs, run
> the hubs up to a 10 port switch, and the switch into an amd450 router.
> While I was designing the network I realized that I wasn't planning on
> using any patch panels, as they seemed rather pointless. Do they serve
hardly pointless.
- more durable - you've got the delicate cable punchdown points protected
behind a faceplate.
- neater. even if the cables are messy in the walls, using a patch panel
you still get all of the connections laid out nice and neat, with labels
(hopefully ;)
- easier to replace damaged cables. 90% of the time, when a cable is
damaged, it's not in the wall, but rather between the wall and the
equipment. a damaged patch cable is much easier to replace (throw it
out and slap in a new one - 30 seconds) than clipping off the end of a
cable running through the wall, and hoping it'll still reach.
> any purpose? What are the pros/cons of stranded vs solid cable? Is the
> solid much thinner, harder to install, and unable to take 90degree turns
> as I have read in various places? Does the overall design have any
> obvious flaws?
solid in the walls, stranted in the patch cables. solid cable causes less
interference, which is important in the longer runs going through the
walls, but is subject to stress damage from constantly being moved around.
while stranded cable, OTOH, causes a little more interference, but is much
more resistant to constant bending.
as for the 90 degree turns, *neither* type of cable will take kindly to a
sharp bend. IIRC, the minimum bend radius is about 3 inches.
oh, and for going through the walls, don't forget to check the building
codes - you may be legally required to use plenum cabling.
--
Frank Sweetser rasmusin at wpi.edu fsweetser at blee.net | PGP key available
paramount.ind.wpi.edu RedHat 5.2 kernel 2.2.5 i586 | at public servers
They can always run stderr through uniq. :-)
-- Larry Wall in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Please help: win98 and linux=headache
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 01:14:23 GMT
Thanks for all your help...i am now about to read and write to the
proper directory in Linux from win98...I also went out and got a book on
Samba, which may be over kill, but I've been getting a headache reading
all the online docs :P
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
------------------------------
From: "David Means" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux Firewalling/Multiple Ethernet Question
Date: 22 Jun 1999 01:53:54 GMT
Chris Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I am interested in setting up a firewall using an existing Linux
> server. I will have a 512K frame relay link connected to a router that
> will then connect into eth0 on the Linux box, and eth1 will connect to
> the internal network. The internal network will be running a class C
> address space, so I need to know how I can go about doing this with
> multiple ethernet cards. Do I need to further break up the address
> range so that each network card will have a different subnet? I
> understand that there may be some issues with the same subnet on 2
> cards.
The simplest scheme conceptually is to break up your Class C address
space into subnets (say 4 bits for host and four bits for subnet), and then
assign one whole subnet to the ethernet segment that connects your Linux
box to the router.
You can then assign one or more subnets to eth1, depending on how
many machines are sharing that ethernet segment.
Somewhat more complicated, but still doable, is to assign "private"
addresses to the ethernet segment that connects the router to the Linux
box. In order to make this work, though, you'll need to set up a default
route in the router, pointing traffic intended for your internal network
towards the intermediate ethernet segment, and likewise, a default route
in the Linux box pointing all non-local traffic at this intermediate
segment.
The reason for these defaults is that neither box would normally try to
route traffic over a private network.
Finally, you might consider what this router is actually doing for you,
and perhaps figure out how to eliminate it or turn it into a modem, so
that you would not have to deal with assigning IP addresses to several
points in a linear chain, when what you actually want is for those
intermediate
stops to be invisible.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (bill davidsen)
Subject: Re: Linux Firewalling/Multiple Ethernet Question
Date: 22 Jun 1999 03:33:50 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Chris Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| I am interested in setting up a firewall using an existing Linux
| server. I will have a 512K frame relay link connected to a router that
| will then connect into eth0 on the Linux box, and eth1 will connect to
| the internal network. The internal network will be running a class C
| address space, so I need to know how I can go about doing this with
| multiple ethernet cards. Do I need to further break up the address
| range so that each network card will have a different subnet? I
| understand that there may be some issues with the same subnet on 2
| cards.
I assume that the boundary router will have an address which is NOT in
your class C, so you just make that the default address, put an address
in the class C on eth1, turn on packet forwarding, and set up firewall
rules.
I suggest setting the firewall with the default to drop everything on
eth0, then allow packets in which you really want in. Probably you will
allow connection to a web server, if you have news you can accept
incoming news feeds, you will want mail to come in, but maybe to a
single machine (preferably not the firewall), etc.
I like to default to drop (not reject, just flat ignore) as the default
policy, then only let in what you need to. If this is too much hassle,
at least drop all tcp packets which have the SYN (open a socket) bit set
without the ack bit (see -y in ipchains), so people can't open a socket
to whatever is unprotected. And drop ICMP totally, or except for ping,
there are security issues there, too.
Be paranoid. feel like the clown on the stool over the pool, who will
get dunked when someone hit the target with a pitch. Then guard the
target.
--
bill davidsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> CTO, TMR Associates, Inc
The Internet is not the fountain of youth, but some days it feels like
the fountain of immaturity.
------------------------------
From: Jan Fure <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: TCI@HOME with linux
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 13:03:43 -0700
Hi;
I am currently able to get the @home cable modem through TCI in
Portland, OR. I would like to hear about linux users experiences, i.e.
can you telnet in, how reliable is it etc.
I am not asking about how to convert from win to linux setup after the
installer leaves, I just want to get a feel for whether users are happy,
if it's worth the extra money.
Also does $150 for installation plus $40/month sound right?
Jan
------------------------------
From: bryan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: cable modem or ASDL
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 03:36:17 GMT
Brad Clawsie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: I have had both.
: I dropped cable modem (like everyone else I know who has had it) due to
: high packet loss and general flakiness.
: My DSL solution is without a doubt far better.
: From what I have heard my cable modem experience is not unique - I
: expect cable modems to go out of vogue as fast as they came in - they
: appear to flake out way too much given their high cost.
the cable modems are the same order of magnatude as dsl modems.
and the cable modems are going thru a major transition from
proprietary to DOCSIS standards. when docsis 1.2 hits the streets,
expect a totally different world (once all the bugs are worked out).
but you need to have realistic expectations about cable vs dsl. dsl
is usually static ip, cable is usually dhcp. dsl usually allows
servers, cable doesn't. dsl is more like a switched connection, cable
is more like a shared one.
all these are strong generalizations, but more accurate than not.
if you don't need to be always-on (servers) then cable may work for
you. I run a server farm at home, so cable is definitely not for me.
otoh, pacbell dsl has been less reliable than the standard proven
techs (t1, isdn, etc).
either way, both techs need to grow a bit more before they're as solid
as the old tried-and-true transports.
--
Bryan [at] Grateful.Net
http://www.Grateful.Net
------------------------------
From: Rim Vilgalys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup,redhat.config
Subject: wvdial w/ redhat doesn't like ibm.net
Date: 20 Jun 1999 20:30:50 GMT
I have Rdhat 5.1, and I have WVdial (as well as other stuff), and the IBM
scripts don't work. Is there anyone else that uses IBM and knows what I
need?
================== Posted via SearchLinux ==================
http://www.searchlinux.com
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
