Linux-Networking Digest #818, Volume #11 Thu, 8 Jul 99 02:13:38 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linux client behind IPchains (Ian Westcott)
Re: Could Microsoft Cheat On The New Mindcraft Benchmark? (I R A Aggie)
Re: IP Aliasing - two networks on the same NIC? (Phil DeBecker)
Re: mgetty and AutoPPP help pretty please! (Sami Yousif)
Re: File Server Hardware ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Could Microsoft Cheat On The New Mindcraft Benchmark? ("Bob Taylor")
Re: WS_FTP and IP masq. (wuz Re: linux gateway? ("David Yuan")
Samba with Win95 over Internet (Ravi Srin)
Re: Ping ? (Chris Mahmood)
Number of tx vs. rx packets for ftp transfer (Dave Friend)
Re: UTP vs coax ("Francis Hoang")
Re-Calculate firewall when ppp comes up ("Carl Filpo")
Ethernet Addr (Becky)
Re: Ethernet Addr ("Andrey Smirnov")
Re: Cable Modem and DHCP ("Steve Snyder")
An Email Problem... ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Netzero on Linux (Sami Yousif)
Re: Connecting Redhat through an NT server (Matt Phillips)
Dial-up: Two level authentication (Brian Edwards)
Re: howto setup to use network card (Kelvin Leung)
pppd looking for strange moduls (Sven Sternberger)
Re: takes long time to connect via telnet. ("Fredrik Lindstr�m")
Re: Could Microsoft Cheat On The New Mindcraft Benchmark? (Chris Rankin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ian Westcott)
Subject: Re: Linux client behind IPchains
Date: 7 Jul 1999 21:01:27 GMT
Eriksson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: I've got a LAN at home. One comp act as a gateway (RH6.0) with IPchains.
:
: All the win9x comps on the network can access the net no probbs.. But with
: my other linux box (Slackware 4.0) I can't seem to do just that... I can
: ping and telnet etc to the gateway but as far as accessing the net behind
: the gatway i'm out of luck.
Perhaps you have a route to the LAN, but not the rest of the net? See if
you have your slackware box using the RH6 box as a gateway -- the route
command should be able to tell you this. Try
route add default gw ip.address.of.rg6.box
and remove any other default gateway. Since you can telnet/ping the
gateway, it sounds like simple networking is set up correctly on the
slackware box, and ipchains is set up right or else the Win9x machines
wouldn't be able to access the net.
--
Ian Westcott Rakarra@IRC
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
"Demon's blood and dragon fire, falling on my wings.
Racing to the battle in the sky and ancient gods are
calling me I hear them when they sing,
of all the heroes who wait for me to die."
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (I R A Aggie)
Crossposted-To:
omp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.infosystems.www.servers.unix,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Could Microsoft Cheat On The New Mindcraft Benchmark?
Date: 7 Jul 1999 20:59:45 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 7 Jul 1999 18:38:32 GMT, Fredrich P. Maney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, in
<7m06r8$lgm$[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
+ from WWII. As for the USA benefitting from WWII, have you even *read*
+ history concerning the war and just how many US troops died? If I remember
+ the population numbers of England correctly, it was more than your entire
+ country (not just your combat dead, but your whole country).
In a word: Bullshit. The costliest US war, in terms of lives lost was the
US Civil War. Please stop while you're behind.
James
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 07 Jul 1999 16:31:17 -0400
From: Phil DeBecker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: IP Aliasing - two networks on the same NIC?
Thomas Edward White wrote:
> I have a cable modem connection on a NIC, and would like to set up a
> small LAN that can connect to the machine with the cable modem, using
> the same NIC that the cable modem uses. After reading the docs, it seems
> to me it would be something like this:
>
> eth0 --> dynamic IP assigned by cable company's dhcp server.
>
> eth0:0 --> static internal IP for the internal LAN. Interface from IP
> aliasing.
>
> Then I could use IP masquerading to route packets through the cable
> modem. The cable modem, it's host computer, and all computers on the LAN
> would connect to the same hub.
>
> Do I have the general idea?
Yep. That's it in a nutshell. If you've already got the DHCP interface
set up as eth0, you can just do "ifconfig eth0:0 inet 192.168.1.1 netmask
255.255.255.0" and there you are. (If you're on a 2.0.x kernel you also
need to do "route add -net 192.168.1.0 dev eth0" but 2.2.x does this
automatically).
This will work fine, but realize that it's still more secure to use two
NICs in the gateway computer. Cable modem networks act like a shared
Ethernet segment, so it may still be possible for someone to sniff your
network and possibly cause you problems. You'll definitely not want to
have writeable Windows shared drives or anything like that.
Phil D.
------------------------------
From: Sami Yousif <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: mgetty and AutoPPP help pretty please!
Date: Wed, 07 Jul 1999 15:51:26 -0500
Scott MacDonald wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Could someone please give me some help with my linux dialin server that is
> configured with mgetty and AutoPPP? When I dial into the server with a
> windows machine, it fires the AutoPPP up fine and everything works great,
> but when I try to dial in with another linux box, it only establishes a
> serial connection and eventually times out. Thanks much!
Configure the other linux box to dialin using PAP.
--
-
Sami Yousif
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.mav.net/teddyr/syousif/ Personal Page
http://www.alug.org/ Amarillo Linux Users Group
[eMail sent to any of my addresses is subject to the Conditions outlined
in http://www.mav.net/teddyr/emailtos.shtml]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: File Server Hardware
Date: Thu, 08 Jul 1999 03:44:51 GMT
Hi, if you've come across this thread and are interested, head over to
comp.os.linux.hardware, there have been a few responses there. Since I
was stupid and didn't link them or better yet didn't cross post, please
post your comments there where they would be more appropriate and better
appreciated.
My humble apologies for adding to the mess of the internet,
Stephen Muench
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
------------------------------
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ("Bob Taylor")
Subject: Re: Could Microsoft Cheat On The New Mindcraft Benchmark?
Crossposted-To:
omp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.infosystems.www.servers.unix,comp.os.linux.misc
Date: Wed, 7 Jul 1999 12:31:30 -0700
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Anthony Ord) writes:
> On 06 Jul 1999 12:33:53 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul
> D. Smith) wrote:
>
> <snip>
>>Maybe you guys should let go of your knee-jerk prejudices WRT the
>>intelligence and attitudes of U.S. posters, and try to think more
>>carefully about what you read before reacting to it.
>>
>>Quite obviously the original comment meant that it wasn't a _world_
>>war until the U.S. declared war on Japan and Germany declared war on the
>>U.S. Before that, it was mainly a European war.
>
> So let me see - excluding Europe and going for the bigger
> countries I can think of from the top of my head...
>
> Canada was involved, India was involved, Japan was involved,
> China was involved, the Soviet Union was involved, South
> Africa was involved, Australia / New Zealand were involved -
> and it was a mainly European war...
Let's see:
1. Canada belonged to Britain.
2. India belonged to Britain.
3. South Africa belonged to Britain.
4. Australia belonged to Britain.
5. New Zealand belonged to Britain.
> What was this about the intelligence of US posters?
What was this about the intelligence of the British? :-)
> And of course it only became a World War when the United
> States of America (with no other country) became involved.
It became a World War whenever it is *defined* to be one.
> What was this about the attitude of US posters?
What was this about the attitude of UK posters?
--
+----------------------------------------------------------------+
| Bob Taylor Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
|----------------------------------------------------------------|
| Gnome certainly is (serious competition to the Mac or Windows) |
| ... I get a charge out of seeing the X Window System work the |
| way we intended..." - Jim Gettys |
+----------------------------------------------------------------+
------------------------------
From: "David Yuan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: WS_FTP and IP masq. (wuz Re: linux gateway?
Date: Wed, 07 Jul 1999 21:02:00 GMT
I enabled "/sbin/modprobe ip_masq_ftp". I have a different problem.I can ftp
between win 98 and linux. But have problem doing ftp between linux boxes.
When I ftp from one linux to the other, I get connected immediately. "cd"
command is very responsive, but "dir" and "get file" seems blocked. It takes
about 5 minutes to transfer 1000 bytes. Any idea?
Thanks,
David
justin P wrote in message ...
>you need to add the following to /etc/rc.d/rc.local:
>/sbin/modprobe ip_masq_ftp
>Justin
><wrote in message news:7m00l0$i03$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> For some reason when I use IP masquerading I cannot ftp from an NT or 98
>> box through my Linux box. I can ftp from the Linux box out, but not
>> indirectly. Shouldn't everything be transparent to the NT or 98 box?
>>
>> -Mike
>>
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 08 Jul 1999 00:08:04 -0400
From: Ravi Srin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Samba with Win95 over Internet
Hello, I'm attempting to configure a Linux box to act as a file server
over the Internet. One of the difficulties that I am encountering arises
from the fact that the user's logon and password on the Win95 client
and the server are not always the same.
>From what I have read, when a networked win95 client attempts to logon
on to SAMBA it will continue to use its Win95 logon when attempting to
connect to the Linux server, although it will allow for a second
password. Has anyone figured (aside from playing with the logon &
password) a solution to this problem?
Thanks in advance.
rs
------------------------------
From: Chris Mahmood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Ping ?
Date: 07 Jul 1999 19:51:20 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
errr, yeah....ping. Write a script that does something like:
#!/bin/bash
while [ : ];
do
sleep 300
ping -c1 somehost.edu
if [ $? -eq 0 ]; then
echo "somehost didn\'t repspond"
fi
done
-ckm
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dave Friend)
Subject: Number of tx vs. rx packets for ftp transfer
Date: 7 Jul 1999 21:31:14 GMT
Reply-To: dave DOT friend AT home DOT com
I have a 2.2.6 box that I used to ftp navigator 4.6 from
ftp.netscape.com via cable modem last night. After the
transfer was done (~9.5 Meg), I noticed that the eth0
interface had about 10000 Tx packets, and 6000+ Rx packets.
The interface was just brought up prior to the transfer
so all of these packets were due to the ftp transfer.
My question is, doesn't that seem a bit high for Rx packets?
I actually have no idea what it should be, but I was sort
of taken aback. It seems strange that I need to send one
packet for every 2 that I get, especially for a simple
download.
The reason I'm concerned is cable upstream is potentially
bandwidth capped, and apparently using upstream bandwidth
can degrade downstream bandwidth, and I've got absolutely
*abysmal* performance with my cable.
Can anyone shed some light?
--
Dave Friend
Not speaking for IBM
dave DOT friend AT home DOT com
------------------------------
From: "Francis Hoang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.irc.networks,alt.os.linux,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.networking
Subject: Re: UTP vs coax
Date: Thu, 8 Jul 1999 13:42:50 +1000
>ethernets) and NICs (if you used 10/100 NICs in the first place). All
>you need to replace is the hub/switch. This is much more cost
>effective.
Could somebody please explain the difference between a switch and a router ?
We have an 8 node LAN which we use for games. Will a switch
be faster then a normal hub ?
Thanks
Francis.
------------------------------
Reply-To: "Carl Filpo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "Carl Filpo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re-Calculate firewall when ppp comes up
Date: Thu, 8 Jul 1999 12:40:10 +0800
I have set up particular firewall rules with ipfwadm.
My problem is that when the ppp link dies and comes up again the
rules are forgotton (or a new set of default rules are deployed).
I currently have some ipfwadm commands in my rc startup file
but the rules no longer apply once the ppp link is brought down,
then up again
I would like to have a particular set of firewall rules deployed each
time the ppp link is brought up. How can I do this ?
.
--
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 8 9375 1144
Fax: +61 8 9375 1141
Mobile: 0407 396 316
=================================================
------------------------------
From: Becky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Ethernet Addr
Date: Thu, 08 Jul 1999 12:11:22 +0800
Hi all,
i want to check the ethernet addr of my network card in linux
(SuSE6.1), which command can i use to find it out?
thx a lot.....
Newbibe
------------------------------
From: "Andrey Smirnov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Ethernet Addr
Date: Wed, 7 Jul 1999 21:40:10 -0700
'ifconfig -a' will tell you ip addresses of all your network cards.
Good luck!
Becky wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>Hi all,
> i want to check the ethernet addr of my network card in linux
>(SuSE6.1), which command can i use to find it out?
> thx a lot.....
>
>Newbibe
------------------------------
From: "Steve Snyder" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: "Steve Snyder" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Cable Modem and DHCP
Date: Wed, 07 Jul 1999 22:15:41 GMT
On Mon, 5 Jul 1999 23:29:51 -0500, Erwin Abinion wrote:
>I recently had a cable modem installed in my house and wanted to connect my
>linux box running RH 6.0 to the modem. My server runs on a Compaq 9232
>running at 90 MHz with 40 MB of RAM
>The modem uses DHCP to get all the network info to the machine. I currently
>have one NetGear FA310TX ethernet card in the machine. I have configured
>this card (eth0) as DHCP. The problem is that it does not get any IP
>address that I can see through netcfg. I have configured the machine with
>the proper DNS servers as well as the gateway used by the cable modem
>(Obtained by connecting an NT server to the modem and running ipconfig). Is
>there anyone who has experienced the same problem or know what the solution
>to my problem is? Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Are you *really* running the DHCP client? RH v6.0 uses pump in it's
network scripts now, not DHCPCD. After trying unsuccessfully to get an IP
address from @Home via pump, I switched to DHCPCD with which it works fine.
Check out the if-up and if-down scripts.
***** Steve Snyder *****
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: An Email Problem...
Date: Thu, 08 Jul 1999 05:14:03 GMT
Is it possible to send an email with an
IP address intstead of a domain name (e.g.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] instead of [EMAIL PROTECTED])?
It hasn't worked yet.
The reason for this request lies in trying to set
up a linux web server that I can test on within
our intranet, but it needs to be accessable from
the internet. I don't want to register a domain
name. I want this box to be able to receive email
without interfering with any domain name. I want
to use only IP addressing. Can I do this and how?
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
------------------------------
From: Sami Yousif <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: Re: Netzero on Linux
Date: Wed, 07 Jul 1999 23:46:06 -0500
Brian Hall wrote:
> Correct. However, it is a Java app, packaged in a Windows executable. There
> should be no problem running it on Linux, once it has been ripped out of its
> Windows outer shell. Someone should start an email campaign to get these
> guys to release a Linux version... Can you imagine- a $200 box, running
> Linux, with FREE net access? I think that could capture a large segment of
> the market, the one that is still not online.
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Anita Lewis wrote:
> >netzero does not work on linux
> >
> >Anita
> >
The problem is that netzero's buisness model depends on them being able to keep
that applet running, and constantly displayed on the screen...
They cant do that with linux.... so there is no real motivation to get it done
(short of a specialized distibution that does not allow switching to a command
line virtual terminal....)
--
-
Sami Yousif
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.mav.net/teddyr/syousif/ Personal Page
http://www.alug.org/ Amarillo Linux Users Group
[eMail sent to any of my addresses is subject to the Conditions outlined
in http://www.mav.net/teddyr/emailtos.shtml]
------------------------------
From: Matt Phillips <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Connecting Redhat through an NT server
Date: 7 Jul 1999 22:30:52 GMT
Andrey Smirnov wrote:
>
> Hello!
>
> When you are logging on NT domain you use Windows 95 client for Microsoft
> Networks.
> When you are using Linux workstation it picks up Ip address from DHCP
> server, also it can relay on NT based DNS. You can setup a samba client
to
> share files with your NT machines, but if you are talking about logging
in
> NT domain and running NT login script and participating in domain as if
you
> are a WIn95 station... there is no such thing for Linux.
>
Not true! Samba is more than happy to log you into an NT domain and you
can act just like a Win95 Workstation. Also, PAM modules such as pam_ntdom
or pam_smbauth claim to be able to allow you to actually log into the Linux
box but authenticate to the NT domain controller instead of the local
password file. (I'm still trying to get either of them to work, however.)
================== Posted via SearchLinux ==================
http://www.searchlinux.com
------------------------------
From: Brian Edwards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Dial-up: Two level authentication
Date: Wed, 07 Jul 1999 23:57:41 -0500
I am having trouble accessing my companies network using my Linux PC.
When I use my Win95 PC it works fine.
The problem is that my work has implemented two levels of
authentication. The first is teminal-based (a Defender 1000 sercurity
server). I am prompted for my id, then I am confronted with a challenge
which I punch into a special calculator, and enter the response.
After this I must authenticate to the Shiva Access server using PAP.
I have come closest to success using KDE's kppp, set for terminal-based
authentication. I authenticate to the Defender succesfully, but the
PAP authentication fails.
I also tried linuxconf along with usernet, but I couldn't even figure
out how to get the terminal screen.
Is there any way to make this work in Linux?
Thanks,
Brian
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kelvin Leung)
Subject: Re: howto setup to use network card
Date: Wed, 07 Jul 1999 15:33:25 -0700
check out the Networking Howto in
sunsite.unc.edu/mdw
Kelvin
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, BM Lam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> we got a mini LAN here. There is a PC hooked up to it on which Linux
> SuSe 5.0
> Kernel 2.0.30 is installiert. We just installed a DLink DE-530CT network
> card into the PC and configured it unter Windows 95.
>
> I have not done a lot research. I wonder if some can tell me:
>
> 1) if the installed Kernel-Version already contains the driver. How
> could I verify this?
>
> 2) If I need to get a driver, where can I find it?
>
> 3) How do I set up Linux to make use of the card
>
> Hints on where I could find relevant documentation on the net would also
> be greatly appreciated
>
> bmlam
------------------------------
From: Sven Sternberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: pppd looking for strange moduls
Date: Wed, 07 Jul 1999 18:31:31 GMT
Hi out there,
I am running a 2.2.10 Kernel in a RH6.0 compatible distribution!
My problem is that after startin a ppp daemon I could read in my
system log something like
Jul 7 19:39:49 host modprobe: can't locate module ppp0:44
The second number runs from 0 to 49, what could this mean??
hope to see ya answer soon
sven
================== Posted via SearchLinux ==================
http://www.searchlinux.com
------------------------------
From: "Fredrik Lindstr�m" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: takes long time to connect via telnet.
Date: Wed, 7 Jul 1999 21:37:21 +0200
needs some clearification.
it's the first connection via telnet that is slow .. ftp,nfs,http works just
fine!
so it's not a dns related problem .. any idea?
Regards Fredrik
Sami Yousif skrev i meddelandet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>"Fredrik Lindstr�m" wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Got a problem on a linux box, RH6 (tried with RH5.2 too, same problem).
>>
>> It takes up to a minute to connect via telnet, to get the login prompt.,
why
>> is that?
>> Everything else works fine, and telnet goes as it should after the
>> loginprompt.
>> Help!
>>
>> Regards Fredrik
>
>set up dns/reverse for your internal net...
>
>or have the ips of all the clients in your /etc/hosts
>
>
>
>--
>-
>
>Sami Yousif
>
>mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>http://www.mav.net/teddyr/syousif/ Personal Page
>http://www.alug.org/ Amarillo Linux Users Group
>
>[eMail sent to any of my addresses is subject to the Conditions outlined
>in http://www.mav.net/teddyr/emailtos.shtml]
>
>[Note: I no longer personally support ARNet (arn.net) as an ISP nor WTAMU
>(wtamu.edu) as an educational institution nor LEK (lektech.com) as a
>Computer Supplier] {http://www.mav.net/teddyr/access/banned.shtml}
>
>[heard somewhere: "You have the right to remain clueless. Anything you
>know may be used against you in a court of law"]
>
>Another day, so many more LARTS to go. [BOFH, BUFH, JOAT]
>
>"Understanding is a three edge sword: Our side, Their Side, and the Truth"
>Babylon 5
>
>Tuesday, January 19th 2038, 03:14:07 UTC: Are YOU Ready?
>
>
>
>
------------------------------
From: Chris Rankin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Could Microsoft Cheat On The New Mindcraft Benchmark?
Date: Wed, 07 Jul 1999 20:47:47 +1000
Hmmm... something is missing from all this ... something like
Computers
Operating Systems
Linux
Networking
Unix
Can this thread find another home, please? The only thing that has
become clear from any of this is that it doesn't belong in this
newsgroup. (And as for the cross-posting ... Geez!)
Chris.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
