Linux-Networking Digest #881, Volume #11 Tue, 13 Jul 99 03:13:47 EDT
Contents:
Re: LINUX - SMTP works too good ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
CABLE MODEM, NETWORK, SLOW SERVER??? ("Eric Pearson")
Re: What can I do after firing up ppp? (Chris Harshman)
Re: Network in a box? (Chris Harshman)
100 Base-T & 32bit 33MHz PCI (Jim Gallagher)
Re: Network in a box? (Netclimber)
Re: How to get IP # of eth1 in script?? ("Andrey Smirnov")
Re: unable to post a message bigger than 75ko (Stuart R. Fuller)
Re: bash: ipfwadm: command not found in RH5.2 (Stuart R. Fuller)
Re: Devise or resource busy (Stuart R. Fuller)
Re: multiple NIC's ("Matt")
Re: Could Microsoft Cheat On The New Mindcraft Benchmark? (Erik Steffl)
Answer: ipfwadm !! (Stephen Loughin)
Re: Call Waiting and PPP (Brad Benner)
Help! - FTP Questions ("Ken Szeto")
Re: Ethertap Details (Sitaram Shastri)
pppd overwrites /etc/HOSTNAME ? ("ingo korndoerfer")
Help! - FTP Questions ("Ken Szeto")
configuring internal mailing with a single POP account (brains)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: LINUX - SMTP works too good
Date: 13 Jul 1999 04:10:18 GMT
Kristy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Just curious...is there a way I can filter attachments using
> sendmail.cf? For example, I would like to stop all *.avi, *.mov, etc.
I can't answer your question but I'd thought that wouldn't be too
effective. THey can just rename the files and the filter would be useless.
Just a thought....
--
==========================================================================
Dan Ghozali Ph(H) +61-3-343-1686
Dept. of Geological Sciences, (W) +61-3-364-2987 ext 7301
University of Canterbury, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Christchurch - New Zealand http://members.tripod.com/kiwidan
==========================================================================
------------------------------
From: "Eric Pearson" <misterp@[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: CABLE MODEM, NETWORK, SLOW SERVER???
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 04:46:41 GMT
(i would appreciate an email reply also as I may not get back here for a
while)
I've got a question (obviously), I'm planning on setting up a network in my
apartment using a cable modem service and the following:
P75, 16megs RAM, 2.1Gig HD, running RedHat 5
K6-2 350, 192megsRAM, 8.4 Gig HD, running WinNT 4.0 but may switch to
Win98 or 2000 when it's released
P200 32megs RAM 4.3 Gig HD running Win98, may switch to NT4 or 2000
25MHz PS/1 8 megs RAM 250 MB HD running RedHat 5, minimal installation for
networking
The Question:
I have to choose one of these computers to act as the host for the cable
modem service, and use "IP Masquerading" to share the net connection. Is it
feasable to use the PS/1 solely for this purpose? (Just tuck it out of the
way) I know it's a slow ass little thing but I don't know how much work it
actually has to do just to dish out the connection. The reason is I'd like
to be able to be working on the other computers, rebooting them and such and
still have the connection to the others active.
Is this impossible and will it slow down my connection? What if I use the
P75? I'd like to avoid using either of the windows machines for this
because I'm sure you know you have to reboot those bitches alot.
Thanx, and I'd appreciate an email copy of any responses.
-Eric pearson
misterp@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Chris Harshman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What can I do after firing up ppp?
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 23:51:05 -0500
Try something like this:
/sbin/ifconfig ppp0 > /tmp/achtun ; mailx -s "My IP address" \
[EMAIL PROTECTED] < /tmp/achtun ; rm /tmp/achtun
Davis Eric wrote:
>
> Hi, there,
>
> I am using RHL 6.0 at home. I use ppp to dial up to Internet. It works
> well.
>
> My question is how to automatically send email to my friend each time
> after I fire up ppp to tell him my dynamic IP address?
>
> Thank you for your advice.
>
> Davis
>
> --
> I do not feel shameful if I was and am an idiot; I
> will feel shameful if I haven't realized it.
> --Myself
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
--
chris [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----------------------------------
"If there is hope," I said, quoting Orwell, "it lies in the proles."
The Billionaire pressed his fingertips together, considering. "Nah,"
he said, finally, and flipped The Switch.
------------------------------
From: Chris Harshman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,comp.os.ms-windows.networking
Subject: Re: Network in a box?
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 23:51:16 -0500
My general experience with those "Network in a Box"
kits (can't speak for these specific instances, but
they're probably the same) is that they're to be
avoided. Not that they don't work - they do. Usually
in Linux, too.
But they're slow. Even the 100Mbps cards. They typically
aren't bus-mastering cards, and so CPU loads spike whenever
the network has traffic. Games frag, interactive logins
suffer, etc.
Spend a little more and get good 3Com cards, Intel EtherExpress
cards, or anything built around a DEC Tulip (21xxx) controller.
I've got a $49 Kingston in one of my servers, and it screams,
and the system doesn't bog whenever a large file gets Xfer'd, etc.
Vikas Agnihotri wrote:
>
> Does anyone have any experiences, good or bad, with the Network-in-a-box
> products out there in the market?
>
> For 100Mbps, here are the prices at a local CompUSA:
>
> SMC: $130
> SohoWare: $80 !!!
> LinkSys: $120
>
> All these include a 4 (+1 uplink) 100Mbps hub, 2 100Mbps PCI cards, 2
> Cat5 cables, manual, drivers, etc.
>
> Is the price right? Any other products? Which is the best? Does it make
> more sense to buy each component piece-meal?
>
> Do these network cards work with Linux? Would the PnP be a problem for
> Linux? Are they _real_ Ethernet cards or just some winmodem-like junk?
>
> Thanks,
> Vikas
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
--
chris [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----------------------------------
"If there is hope," I said, quoting Orwell, "it lies in the proles."
The Billionaire pressed his fingertips together, considering. "Nah,"
he said, finally, and flipped The Switch.
------------------------------
From: Jim Gallagher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: 100 Base-T & 32bit 33MHz PCI
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 22:01:43 -0700
I've been considering upgrading my home network to 100 Base-T, given how
cheap the required hardware has become. I thought I might be able to get
close to 10 MByte/s on file transfers between my boxes, but I wasn't
sure. Well, it seems that this is WAY too optimistic. I just read an
article in Network World (July 5 issue) where fast vs gigabit ethernet
throughput was compared. Gigabit aside, the throughput for fast ethernet
between PCs in ideal conditions was ~20Mbit/s! (BTW, gigabit was
~25Mbit/s) The author's (Jeffrey Fritz) conclusion: OS handling of the
IP and TCP layer checksums causes so much overhead that the CPU can't
process the packets fast enough.
He said "Newer NICs incorporate dedicated processors and MACs that are
IP-aware, meaning they can process IP packets and perform IP checksums
using hardware. In addition, large FIFO NIC memory buffers will increase
performance by providing a buffer big enough to store a number of
complete packets."
Here's my question: Does anyone know any NICs that fall into this
category? If so, are they PC class cards (32 bit, 33 MHz PCI)? And of
course, are there drivers for Linux?
------------------------------
From: Netclimber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,comp.os.ms-windows.networking
Subject: Re: Network in a box?
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 00:45:23 -0500
Ive got the SOHOware network in a box and I have no complaints. However, I
am just using it for file backups, extended storage, printing, etc. The
speed is definatly not top notch but for $80 ya get what ya pay for.
The setup of this box set was pretty basic. Install cards, plug in the
provided cables(at 25 feet they are LONG), let win98 detect the cards, point
to the right drivers, and make the appropriate network settings from the
controll panel.
The one hangup I did have was that win98 drivers are provided online (not on
the disk I was provided). Get this, they included a flier saying that I had
to download these win98 drivers, but did not update the floppy that held the
win95 drivers!
I tried using the drivers that were provided on the disk for win98 and they
actualy (IMOHO) work better.
Just my two cents
Netclimber
Vikas Agnihotri wrote:
> Does anyone have any experiences, good or bad, with the Network-in-a-box
> products out there in the market?
>
> For 100Mbps, here are the prices at a local CompUSA:
>
> SMC: $130
> SohoWare: $80 !!!
> LinkSys: $120
>
> All these include a 4 (+1 uplink) 100Mbps hub, 2 100Mbps PCI cards, 2
> Cat5 cables, manual, drivers, etc.
>
> Is the price right? Any other products? Which is the best? Does it make
> more sense to buy each component piece-meal?
>
> Do these network cards work with Linux? Would the PnP be a problem for
> Linux? Are they _real_ Ethernet cards or just some winmodem-like junk?
>
> Thanks,
> Vikas
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
------------------------------
From: "Andrey Smirnov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: How to get IP # of eth1 in script??
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 22:31:47 -0700
Try this:
IPADDRESS1=`ifconfig eth1 | grep addr: | awk -F " " '{print $2}'| awk -F :
'{print $2}'`
You need to use the 'reverse qoutes' (on the same buttom as a tilde ~).
Good luck!
PS. Also you can export this variable from your .profile, so you can use it
in other scripts.
David Kennedy wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>I hope you do not mind my asking a stupid question, but how did you
>get the address into a variable in the script?
>
>I would like IPADDRESS1= the ip of eth1?
>
>Thanks.
>
>
>
>On Mon, 12 Jul 1999 04:42:11 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Eric Cartman)
>wrote:
>
>>Andrey,
>>
>>Thanks a lot, this was just what I needed.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>On Fri, 9 Jul 1999 21:45:58 -0700, "Andrey Smirnov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>Try the following:
>>>
>>>ifconfig eth1 | grep addr: | awk -F " " '{print $2}'| awk -F : '{print
$2}'
>>>
>>>Good luck!
>>>
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stuart R. Fuller)
Subject: Re: unable to post a message bigger than 75ko
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 05:00:03 GMT
Christophe Pecquerie ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: We use a linux server for our internal newsgroup server but we can't send
: message bigger than 75000 bytes. what's the way to switch the size limit to
: 2Mbytes or more? Thanks a lot for your help.
There are several news servers for Linux, and there are several news readers
for Linux. If you want a specific answer, you need to post some specifics.
Stu
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stuart R. Fuller)
Subject: Re: bash: ipfwadm: command not found in RH5.2
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 05:00:04 GMT
Stephen Loughin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: I've been running RedHat 5.2 for a few months now, and just tried to
: reconfigure
: my kernal to use IP Masquerading. I have Butzen and Hilton's book "The
: Linux
: Network" (which of course is for Slackware not RH) and went through the
: kernel reconfig they recommend to turn on the IP Firewall / Masquerading
: services.
: The make procedures went well, I installed my new kernel and tested it,
: but
: when I go to try any of the ipfwadm commands, I get the message
:
: "bash: ipfwadm: command not found"
:
: It also complains about ip_forward, ipchains, and similar commands that
: all the HOWTO's seem to expect I already have available.
:
: Anybody got a hint for me? Do I gotta upgrade to RH6?
Here's a hint. The "ipfwadm" program on my RH 5.1 system is in package
ipfwadm-2.3.0-6
Stu
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stuart R. Fuller)
Subject: Re: Devise or resource busy
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 05:00:03 GMT
Ronald J. Yacketta ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: Hello all!!
: I have a bit of a problem here
: I have two nic's in my linux box , one is a rtl8139 and the other is a
: tulip.
: When I boot I see error messages saying that eth0 and eth1 are delayed.
: I tried to load the mod manualy and get a error stating "Device or resource
: busy"
It usually means that the IRQ or DMA channel that the device wants to use is
already in use by some other device, hence "resource busy".
Stu
------------------------------
From: "Matt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: multiple NIC's
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 04:42:12 GMT
Next problem...
I am not able to ping inbetween the two machines. I have my linux machine
connected to the cable modem through eth1 and eth0 is connect to my hub. I
get all greens on the hub, and the windows machine can see itself in the
"network neighboorhood" but when I try to ping each other I get nothing.
And, if I am running windows on both of the machines I can't see each other
in the "network neighborhood" . Thanks.
-Matt
John Parker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:uuqi3.31941$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Matt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >I am running Red Hat 6.0, 2.2.5, and I have been trying to get my second
> >ethernet card up so I can use IP MASQ.
> >
> >I have a 3c905 for the eth0, which works fine, and is connected to the
> >cable modem.
> >
> >But the non-working one is a 3c509, and PnP is turned off! I have tried
> >used the "append" thing in the lilo.config file I have tried playing
> >around with "linuxconf" but when I boot the machine it says that it is
> >delaying eth1, and there is a "FAILED" in red next to it, when all the
> >others are "OK". Any help would be greatly appericated. I am sorry if
> >I missed anything, I am kinda new to this. Thanks again.
> >
> >-Matt
> >
>
> I have the exact same OS, the exact same two cards, and went through the
exact
> same problem! I finally reinstalled RH with the 3c509 ONLY in the
machine,
> then added the 3c905 using linuxconf. The interface came up immediately,
and
> has worked beautifully since!
>
> I don't know if you can reinstall, maybe try an upgrade with the 3c509
only in
> place?
>
> HTH,
>
> John
------------------------------
From: Erik Steffl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
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: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 22:04:15 -0700
OK, so coul MS cheat or not?
erik
De Messemaeker Johan wrote:
>
> "Paul D. Smith" wrote:
>
> > Hmm. So you're saying that without any participation by any country on
> > one side of the world, it's still a _world_ war? Nice, very nice.
>
> That's not what i said. WOII was on three continents and there were a lot of
> country's involved ...
>
> > Or, put another way, would you call a war that didn't involve _any_
> > European countries a world war? Uh huh.
>
> Personally, i would if the area was big enough ...
------------------------------
From: Stephen Loughin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Answer: ipfwadm !!
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 01:00:34 -0400
So, I answered my own question. It appears I did'na have the ipfwadm*.rpm
package
*installed* even though I did end up with support for it in my recompiled
kernel.
I was able to download ipfwadm-2.3.0-6.i386.rpm from ftp.redhat.com, and then
after I executed the command
rpm -Uvh ipfwadm-2.3.0-6.i386.rpm
I was able to execute the necessary ipfwadm commands to start ip masquerading
on my RH5.2 installation. Yipee. I now have to walk over to my Wintel box and
teach it how to Samba !
Best regards,
-- Steve
Stephen Loughin wrote:
> Perhaps you can, though, could you tell me where these command
> executables live on your system? (e.g. which ipfwadm or use find)
> Thanks -- Steve.
>
> Mark Johnson wrote:
>
> > Stephen Loughin wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Anybody got a hint for me? Do I gotta upgrade to RH6?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > -- Steve.
> >
> > Can't help much, other than to tell you that I had no trouble with ipfwadm
> > under kernel 2.0.34 (RH5.1), nor with ipchains after upgrading to kernel
> > 2.2.9.
------------------------------
From: Brad Benner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Call Waiting and PPP
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 23:36:51 -0600
Tsaroth wrote:
> Does anyone know a way to make either pppd or chat less crashproof.
> Under Windows someone calls me when online, and call waiting kicks me
> off and I get the phonecall (Which I like). Under Linux though the
> call waiting beep doesn't kick me off, so I either need to make
> pppd/chat know to turn off at the beep, or force them to crash at it.
> I'm running RedHat 5.2 on a laptop with Megahertz PC-card modem.
>
> Tsaroth Blackhand
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 01010100 01110011 01100001 01110010 01101111 01110100 01101000
Usually, the phone system has a special code that you can enter to turn
off the call waiting tones for the duration of the call. You can add
these to the beginning of your dial string in PPP. Check with your
local phone company and see what they say.
--
Brad Benner
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Ken Szeto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.redhat,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Help! - FTP Questions
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 06:29:05 GMT
I am currently running Linux 6.0 and have the following FTP related
questions...
1) I installed Anonymous FTP during the setup process and it is working
fine as long as I login using anonymous. However, I cannot login using any
of the user account that I have setup. Why is that? Should I reinstall the
entire OS and not choose Anonymous? Reason I wanted to login using accounts
in my Linux box is because I can download information from the Linux box but
cannot upload files into the Linux box. I tried creating an additional
directory and give it full access using "chmod a+rwx <directory name> but
FTP client complains that I do not have the right permission to do an
upload. I even used chgrp to assigned the directory to the ftp account but
this didn't fix the problem either...
2) I am using the above Linux box as a router by using ipchains to forward
IP from my Windows 98 client to the Internet. Everything works on my
Windows 98 machine except for FTP clients. Using WSFTP to connect to sites
such as Netscape will return an error message with the following text, "500
Illegal PORT Command" "! Failed "port". If I telnet into the Linux box and
do an FTP session to external sites, exerything works fine. Also, if I do
an FTP session to my own Linux box, everything works fine except for the
problem mentioned above....
If anyone knows anything about my problems or have excountered them before,
please let me know how you solved them :-)
Thank you in advance.
Ken Szeto
------------------------------
From: Sitaram Shastri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: redhat.networking.general
Subject: Re: Ethertap Details
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 06:30:59 GMT
Sitaram Shastri wrote:
> Hello people,
I am trying to set up communication
between two ethernet
cards on two boxes running RedHat 6.0, kernel 2.2.5-15 , without
using TCP/IP . I think ethertap is a possible solution . So , can
someone post me
more details about ethertap , how to use it , etc .
Please reply to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thank you,
Sitaram Shastri.
>
> ------------------
Posted via SearchLinux ------------------
>
http://www.searchlinux.com
================== Posted via SearchLinux ==================
http://www.searchlinux.com
------------------------------
From: "ingo korndoerfer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: pppd overwrites /etc/HOSTNAME ?
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 23:53:50 -0700
i'm new to linux, so please excuse the simple question.
i got pppd to run, it dials in fine and everything looks real nice.
however, during that process, somehow my /etc/HOSTNAME
gets overwritten with what probably is the server or the modem
i am dialing into. it surprises me somewhat that i can do that as a regular
user. but i guess pppd is suid root.
anyways ... the messed up hostname effectively blocks
any other x-applications, su <other user>s etc. and persists even after
i 'shutdown' (=logout) and, even worse, forces me to reboot
(coldstart) to get back onto the machine. even a proper /sbin/ifdown
will not cure that.
i spent hours looking through the HOWTOs and FAQ lists
and could not find anything, so it must be in my very personal setup here.
anybody any suggestions for me where to look ?
how can i fix that ?
any help would be greatly appreciated.
ingo
------------------------------
From: "Ken Szeto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.redhat,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Help! - FTP Questions
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 06:36:00 GMT
I am currently running Linux 6.0 and have the following FTP related
questions...
1) I installed Anonymous FTP during the setup process and it is working
fine as long as I login using anonymous. However, I cannot login using any
of the user account that I have setup. Why is that? Should I reinstall the
entire OS and not choose Anonymous? Reason I wanted to login using accounts
in my Linux box is because I can download information from the Linux box but
cannot upload files into the Linux box. I tried creating an additional
directory and give it full access using "chmod a+rwx <directory name> but
FTP client complains that I do not have the right permission to do an
upload. I even used chgrp to assigned the directory to the ftp account but
this didn't fix the problem either...
2) I am using the above Linux box as a router by using ipchains to forward
IP from my Windows 98 client to the Internet. Everything works on my
Windows 98 machine except for FTP clients. Using WSFTP to connect to sites
such as Netscape will return an error message with the following text, "500
Illegal PORT Command" "! Failed "port". If I telnet into the Linux box and
do an FTP session to external sites, exerything works fine. Also, if I do
an FTP session to my own Linux box, everything works fine except for the
problem mentioned above.... Is there something wrong with my IPCHAINS
setup?
If anyone knows anything about my problems or have excountered them before,
please let me know how you solved them :-)
Thank you in advance.
Ken Szeto
------------------------------
From: brains <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: configuring internal mailing with a single POP account
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 12:24:03 +0530
WE have a POP account for sending Mails and browsing Internet. I our
network we have many users who would like to get mails individually
using the same account. It is like having multiple internal account with
only ine POP accounts. for example:
if Jatin is a user and a mail is sent to us with address "jatin"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and we get this message linux should send it
automatically to jatin's account.
Please tell us and give us complete coding to help us in doing the
above. Please mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
