Linux-Networking Digest #666, Volume #11 Fri, 25 Jun 99 14:14:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: IP address binding to interface device .. (Chandrashekhar)
Re: (almost panic) Re: Help: domain propagation (J�r�me PETAZZONI)
Re: broadcast packets not dispatched (Tom Wojciaczyk)
Re: Why not C++ (John Jensen)
Re: routing problem ("Andrey Smirnov")
Re: Long delays during service requests + where is a POP server?? ("Andrey Smirnov")
Re: What network cards at 100Mbs works best with linux ????? (Rod Smith)
Re: Why not C++ (John E. Davis)
printing on a lan (Richard)
Use IPCHAINS to forward ext. port 80 to internal addy? ("eLicT")
Re: PROXY (Jim Noeth)
Re: IP address binding to interface device .. ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
HOWTO:Mount WIN98 Partitions from Linux 5.2 (Prentice Weitman)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Chandrashekhar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.protocols.tcp-ip
Subject: Re: IP address binding to interface device ..
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 1999 14:21:09 +0100
shyam wrote:
>
> Hello,
> I am trying to understand why does the internet address bind to the
> interface in IP suite of protocols. In my limited knowledge , other
> protocols do not have this limitation.
How else will you identify a device on the network? Ultimately, a packet
is sent to a destination by mapping the IP address to the interface
address, in the last lap of its journey. Which other protocols are you
referring to.
> For eg., in a machine with dual ethernets , it is imperative that they
> have different ip addresses. Thus , you cannot have load sharing or
> failover capabilities between the connected machines in spite of the
> having more than one physical network.
Sorry - but do you mean more than one interface card for a device??
Failover capabilities are provided by a product called MC-Service Guard.
And I'm sure there are many more.
hth,
Chandru
--
Ericsson Systems Expertise Ltd., Athlone, Ireland.
Tel: +353 902 31816
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (J�r�me PETAZZONI)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.networking
Subject: Re: (almost panic) Re: Help: domain propagation
Date: 25 Jun 1999 17:52:47 +0200
Scientia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 2) Even my IP does not work: if I browse http://216.121.32.8
> it is not seen
> >you apparently do NOT have a webserver running
> >there.
> Do you mean that my IP does not work?
it works perfectly. DNS works. but you don't have a web server
running on your machine.
> I have only a silly doubt: I typed nameservers as lower cases,
> while I see that usually see that nameservers are upper cases.
> May this be the reason of the problem?!
> Are nameservers case sensitive?
> However, DNS addresses (numbers) are right.
no problem, it's totally acse insensitive and uppercase letters
are more readable ;)
> >Do you have apache setup?
> My provider has
YOU should setup your server, too.
------------------------------
From: Tom Wojciaczyk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: broadcast packets not dispatched
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 1999 11:25:33 -0400
Make sure your linux box has a route for the broadcasts. If you are
using an absolute IP broacast of 255.255.255.255, you will need to do
a route add -host 255.255.255.255 dev eth0 and try it then. Sometimes
route doesn't like to see 255.255.255.255, so you need to alias a name
to the string 255.255.255.255, all of which is documented in a ISC's
DHCPd docs (DHCPd listens to 255.255.255.255 for DHCP reqs).
=============================================================
:Tom Wojciaczyk, IT Engineer
:Cisco Systems, Inc.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Hello,
> I'm facing a strange problem and I have no idea
> wether it is due to my Slackware Linux and its
> configuration or to a programming mistake of mine.
>
> My programme is a port from AIX 4 on which it
> works alright. It sends broadcast packets to a
> certain address and port on a network. I've also
> written another programme that listens to a
> certain socket for broadcast messages. It also
> works alright on AIX.
>
------------------------------
From: John Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.development.system
Subject: Re: Why not C++
Date: 25 Jun 1999 13:31:28 GMT
Jan Panteltje <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: >In article <wt4sjyngo9.fs C++ and Java are
: >much better than C. Dylan is much better than C++ and Java.
: >
: Well if I distill 'better' from that, then (I have not tested Dylan, liked
: some of Bops songs though), then it must be f*cking slow and bloated.
I might as well mention yet another option. (This is getting to be my
standard blurb to let people know about TOM, if you've seen it before
please skip.)
I've also been playing with the question of what language to use for Linux
apps. So far, I've done one simple GTK+ app in C, and a second
implementation in an OO language ... for which I chose TOM. I'm much more
at ease writing OO, having most recenlty oriented my programming neurons
for Java. If you'd like to see the C, TOM, and Java implementations, the
source is available at:
C: http://www.primenet.com/~jjens/maze.c
TOM: http://www.primenet.com/~jjens/Maze.t
Java: http://www.primenet.com/~jjens/maze.html
Trying to do OO with C connectivity is always a compromise, but I think
TOM strikes a good balance. It offers better OO than Java, but is built
for native compilation. It has GC. It offers good support for Linux
tools and shared libraries. It offers C connectivity by letting you use
html-ish tags to include C within TOM:
<doc>from Window.t </doc>
instance (id)
new int window_type
{
pointer p;
<c>
p = gtk_window_new (window_type);
</c>
= [[self alloc] init p];
}
The TOM page is http://www.gerbil.org/tom
John
------------------------------
From: "Andrey Smirnov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: routing problem
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 1999 15:29:40 -0700
Look at IP_MASQ HOWTOs:
http://metalab.unc.edu/LDP/HOWTO/mini/IP-Masquerade.html
Your routing looks good, but you need to do a couple more things to let
machines on local LAN access Internet.
Good luck!
Ralf Kneemeyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
Hi,
who can help to set up a routing for
local net/gateway/internet ?
The gateway is a Linux Kernel 2.2.5 box,
routing table looks like this:
Kernel IP routing table
Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use
Iface
192.168.1.1 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 UH 1 0 0
dummy0
192.168.1.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0
195.4.34.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0
ippp0
127.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 U 0 0 0 lo
0.0.0.0 195.4.34.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0
ippp0
But I cann�t reach the outside world by a ping out of the local net.
Everything done from that gatemachine works fine.
Ping between localnet and gateway works also.
Thanx in advance !
--
Ralf
------------------------------
From: "Andrey Smirnov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Long delays during service requests + where is a POP server??
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 1999 15:46:28 -0700
You may want to check your cable. Also TCP/IP stack on Win is pritty
unstable, so try to remove everything from your network configuration and
reinstall it again.
Good luck!
Rafo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Hello:
>
> I have a similar setup, WIN98 and Linux (Slakware). However, I can't get
them
> to talk. It has been suggested that my WIN98 setup may be the problem.
>
> My configuration is as follows:
>
> 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 (SMC NIC), 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.
>
> Could you share with me your WIN98 settings, or provide guidance?
>
> Thanks,
> RA
>
> Hippy wrote:
>
> > Hiya everyone,
> >
> > I have a win98 machine and a linux box (RedHat v6.0). They can talk
to
> > each other with no problem (pings always work with no delay). But,
there's a
> > huge delay when trying to initiate connections to services.
> >
> > I've tried telnets, ftps and https. All of them can produce a delay
for
> > up to a minute at a time. When you're trying to browse the linuxconf web
> > version, it's a real pain (putting it mildly:) because it delays for
every
> > page load. I'm pretty sure that the problem's on the linux box - I can
see
> > the net traffic which shows the win98 machine performing retries. Once
> > connected (i.e. telnet) there's no problem from then on. FTP Explorer
claims
> > to connect straight away, but then waits for ages to initiate the
d/load.
> >
> > I'm also trying to find a POP server. Despite what everyone says
(I've
> > seen other discussions about this) about a pop server being on the
redhat
> > distribution, I haven't found it yet - or anything on the red hat site.
I
> > eventually found qpopper v5.2 - but the RPM seems to be incomplete (or
it
> > doesn't match what its documents say). Can anyone give me a *definite*
> > location/url where I can find it??
> >
> > Any help appreciated...
> >
> > Hippy.
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rod Smith)
Subject: Re: What network cards at 100Mbs works best with linux ?????
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 1999 14:00:04 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[Posted and mailed]
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
interzone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I have bought two Fast Ethernet cards CNET PRO120 , the chip inside is
> a Macronix 98715 , normally it works with the drivers tulip , but it's
> been one month I have tried to make it works, without success.
This statement is self-contradictory. I assume you mean that it's
SUPPOSED to work with the Tulip drivers, but that you've tried for a month
to get it to work without success.
> I had all the problem you can ever imagine... Cards were not recognize ,
> then yes , after only one of the two computer with exactly the same
> config , don't find the card... so I decide to sell these cards , and to
> buy two new cards , still at 100Mbs Fast Ethernet...
Before you sell the cards, try the latest Tulip drivers. Many of the
Tulip clone chipsets (like the Macronix) work poorly, if at all, with the
drivers that come standard with kernels through at least 2.2.9 (I've not
tried any later kernels). The latest drivers can be obtained from
http://cesdis.gsfc.nasa.gov/linux/drivers/tulip-devel.html.
> Which card are known to worrk the best , with linux ...What model I can
> buy with eyes close , and that will works without problems.... It is
> very important for me to establish this fast network , with my computer
> , so if , someone can help me choosing a card, it will be coool....
If you want something that will work with stock kernels and whatnot, your
best choices are 3COM 3c905b-based 10/100 boards (EtherLink XL, I think
is what they're called) and Intel EtherExpress 10/100 boards. At least,
by all accounts; I've never used either of these myself. I've had good
luck recently with a D-Link DFE-530TX, which uses the Linux VIA Rhine
drivers included in kernels since somewhere in the late 2.0.x series, but
comments in the driver source imply that this may not be the speediest
performer available. Most of the 10/100 PCI NICs available today use
clones of the Tulip chipset, and most of these will work fine with Linux
after you've updated the Tulip driver with the latest version (it's an
easy update if you know how to compile your own kernel).
--
Rod Smith
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.channel1.com/users/rodsmith
NOTE: Remove the "uce" word from my address to mail me
Author of _Special Edition Using WordPerfect for Linux_, from Que;
see http://www.channel1.com/users/rodsmith/books.html
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John E. Davis)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.development.system
Subject: Re: Why not C++
Date: 25 Jun 1999 16:15:46 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sat, 26 Jun 1999 00:53:24 +1200, Bruce Hoult <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Not true, IMHO. Even such simple things as // comments, declaring
>variables at first use, inline functions and const instead of #define,
>structs as type names, references, cleaned-up casting, and default
>arguments make C++ better than C.
None of these things compel me to use C++. The C compiler, e.g., gcc,
will automatically inline small functions functions. In addition, gcc
supports an `inline' keyword. As far as structs as type names go, why
not use a typedef? That is,
typedef struct
{
int whatever;
}
Whatever;
Whatever X;
Now consider references:
int x;
x = 1;
some_function (x);
what will be x's value after the call to some_function? Will it be
altered? In C, I know immediately know the answer to the question and
do not have to look further. This kind of syntactic sugar disturbs me
as one who reads a lot of software that I did not write.
Regarding //, in two keystrokes, my editor puts /* */ at the end of
the current line and places the cursor in the middle. If the comment
requires more than one line, I either hit return to continue onto the
next line, or reformat the comment as text. I claim that very little
is achieved by using // comments.
Please note, I am not arguing that C++ is not a better language than
C. I am just saying that the reasons that you listed do not make it a
better language. In my opinion, the only thing that C++ has over C is
better support for data encapsulation via classes and, possibly,
exception handling. Other features such as operator overloading I can
do without because of the potential for abuse.
--
John E. Davis Center for Space Research/AXAF Science Center
617-258-8119 One Hampshire St., Building NE80-6019
http://space.mit.edu/~davis Cambridge, MA 02139-4307
------------------------------
From: Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: printing on a lan
Date: Sat, 26 Jun 1999 01:06:34 -0600
I work at an isp, and am the only one on my lan that runs linux,
everybody else win98 in a peer to peer network.
what i need to know is how to get my linux box to be able to print like
everyone elses box's do.
our network printer is attached via serial port to a win98 box.
i realize i prolly cant get a step by step because ive probably been to
vague, but I would like to atleast know what is involved in it and also
the things i would need installed on my box.
thank you.
------------------------------
From: "eLicT" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Use IPCHAINS to forward ext. port 80 to internal addy?
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 1999 17:18:04 GMT
I am having trouble setting up IPCHAINS to forward port 80 from my
cablemodem to an internal IP (10.0.0.12). I have IPCHAINS working and
masqing for web browsing, and email, but need to have my web server be
accessable from the outside. Any ideas? I am running redhat 6.
Thanks!
-e
------------------------------
From: Jim Noeth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: PROXY
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 1999 17:42:32 GMT
Look at /usr/doc/HOWTO/mini/IP-Masquerade on your linux box (assuming
you installed the HOWTO documentation. This is one way to accomplish
what you want. The other is to use a proxy server (squid is one that is
available for linux).
Jim
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Marlon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > I linux box(198.168.200.1) doing PPP. How do I get WIN95
> > (198.168.200.2) Browser to connect to the internet through the linux
> > box?
> > I can telnet from win95 to linux.
> >
> > JJ
> >
> > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> > Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
>
> I too am trying to do the same thing. I have a Linux box with IP
> 192.168.1.254 with my Win95 logged into in with samba. My Win95's IP
is
> 192.168.1.2.
>
> How do I get my Win95 client to share my PPP connection that Linux has
> up and running?
>
>
--
Jim Noeth
A. G. Edwards and Sons, Inc.
Opinions expressed are mine and are not necessarily those of my
employer.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.protocols.tcp-ip
Subject: Re: IP address binding to interface device ..
Date: 25 Jun 1999 13:33:37 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, shyam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hello,
>
> I am trying to understand why does the internet address bind to the
>interface in IP suite of protocols. In my limited knowledge , other
>protocols do not have this limitation.
I don't see it as a limitation. How will you set up a routing table if
you have two adapters with the same IP address?
>For eg., in a machine with dual ethernets , it is imperative that they
>have different ip addresses. Thus , you cannot have load sharing or
>failover capabilities between the connected machines in spite of the
>having more than one physical network.
>
> Or is it that there are tools that beat this and I am ignorant of
>this ;-(
Here's one approach.
http://linux.zipworld.com.au/redundant_linux_paper/
Joe
------------------------------
From: Prentice Weitman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: HOWTO:Mount WIN98 Partitions from Linux 5.2
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 1999 10:31:23 -0400
I think I have this right????
/dev/hdb13 / ext2 defaults
1 1
/dev/hdb1 /boot ext2 defaults
1 2
/dev/hdb5 /home ext2 defaults
1 2
/dev/hdb9 /opt ext2 defaults
1 2
/dev/hdb8 /tmp ext2 defaults
1 2
/dev/hdb6 /usr ext2 defaults
1 2
/dev/hdb7 /usr/local ext2 defaults
1 2
/dev/hdb11 /usr/src ext2 defaults
1 2
/dev/hdb10 /var ext2 defaults
1 2
/dev/hdb12 swap swap defaults
0 0
/dev/fd0 /mnt/floppy ext2 auto
0 0
/dev/cdrom /mnt/cdrom iso9660 auto,ro
0 0
/dev/hda /mnt/win98 WINFAT2 auto,ro
0 0
/dev/hda1 /mnt/win98 WINFAT2 auto,ro
0 0
none /proc proc defaults
0 0
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
