Linux-Networking Digest #97, Volume #12 Tue, 3 Aug 99 19:13:40 EDT
Contents:
RH 6.0 networking (Marc)
Re: ipchains help (Raymonds Doetjes)
Re: Will a router work to share 1 IP (Raymonds Doetjes)
Will a router work to share 1 IP (Christopher)
Re: Setting up a Network with Win 95 & 98 (Gustin Kiffney)
Re: Jserv and Apache (Gustin Kiffney)
Re: Setting up a Network with Win 95 & 98 (Roy Grimm)
!! HELP !! Sendmail v8.8.7 : Linux RH5.2 POP/SMTP server on an ADSL connex
questions... ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: 3c509 ("Cliff")
a really hard "net"work problem (Helmut Artmeier)
Re: ipautofw (Raymonds Doetjes)
Re: Can't telnet myself (Florian Lorenzen)
Engineer ("Romiko")
SOLUTION: netatalk and the dreaded nbp_rgstr (Andy McFadden)
Re: more than 1 ethernet card in a box? (Raymonds Doetjes)
Re: Can't telnet myself (Thomas Zajic)
Real NAT on RH60 ??? (Tobias Goerig)
Re: virtualhosts for ftpd? (Ralf Gerlich)
Re: Connect to Windows NT over telephone line ("Romiko")
Re: linux and win98 mails (Raymonds Doetjes)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Marc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.questions,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: RH 6.0 networking
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1999 13:18:25 -0400
I am running RedHat 6.0 as a router, web, and ftp server connecting to
my ISP through ADSL. The problem I am having is that sometimes I can
ping the machine from work and other times I cannot. I can always get
to the internet from the machine or any of the machines on my home
network. What could cause Linux or my machine to have the networking up
sometimes and down other times? Both ethernet cards in the Linux
machine are Intel EtherExpress Pro 100Bs (to the hub and to the ADSL
bridge).
Any help would be appreciated
Thanks,
Marc
------------------------------
From: Raymonds Doetjes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: ipchains help
Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1999 00:10:28 +0200
Tha masquerading will suply you with enough security against people
wanna check out the rest of your network behind the "firewall". Wich
will not help in your case since you only have 1 ip address and the
Winbox is on a privat net.
Relocating your telnet is what we call security by obscurity. It means
that you try to secure it by hiding it or hoping no-one ever tries using
it. But it is smart.
What you should try is if you can login as root using telnet that would
be very dangerous! (standard it is off).
Disabling ftp is also very smart some "wiseguys" can pump your hardisk
full of junk when they can write as anonymous.
What very importnat is is to disable the finger port!
ANd if you don't use SMTP disable sendmail. Sendmail is a potential
security risc, but is lately very pretty secure.
About your MAC address problem that is pretty strange, it looks like 2
arp's were laid over each other. Or reflection from the LAN. SInce the
MAC addresses are Unique (theoraticaly).
I had once found out that I had one very old madge Tokenring card and
one very new wich clashed in the network since the both had the same MAC
address. Just unlucky.
The changes that one person wich has the same MAC address as you are
very very very slim and that they also get to your box will be nearly
impossible.
Raymond
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I am using Redhat 6.0 for a firewall between my local lan and the
> internet. I am connected to the net via cablemodem and everything is
> working ok right now. The problem is I have a very limited ipchains
> script that is only three lines. My fear is that it is not secure
> enough. The more I read about how the hackers get in, the more
> worried I get. Listed below is my current ipchains script.
>
> ipchains -F
> ipchains -P forward DENY
> ipchains -A forward -s 192.168.1.0/16 -j MASQ
>
> I have a very limited inetd.conf and I have disabled inbound ftp and
> relocated the telnet port. My question is how exposed am I? I
> received a message on my 98 box that said there was a conflict with
> another MAC using 192.168.1.2, which is the address of my 98 box.
> The MAC it listed is not on my lan. Is this a sign of someone
> spoofing my firewall?
>
> Thanks
>
> Paul
------------------------------
From: Raymonds Doetjes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: redhat.servers.general
Subject: Re: Will a router work to share 1 IP
Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1999 00:14:34 +0200
Yes this is possible. Linux can do this asswell.
In linux it is called masquerdading it is a firewall feature within the
kernel.
And most routers can do it asswell, it is called NAT.
Raymond
Christopher wrote:
> Here is my problem. I am getting ready to move in to my dorm, which has a
> connection to the university network. However they only give you one port
> with one IP address and I have multiple computers I want to connect.
> Someone told me that I could use a router in this situation. Giving all
> the computers behind the router fake IP addresses. So my question is can
> I take a linux box turn it into a router and connect all my computers to
> the one IP address? And if not is there anyway I can do it?
>
> ------------------ Posted via SearchLinux ------------------
> http://www.searchlinux.com
------------------------------
From: Christopher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: redhat.servers.general
Subject: Will a router work to share 1 IP
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1999 21:30:37 GMT
Here is my problem. I am getting ready to move in to my dorm, which has a
connection to the university network. However they only give you one port
with one IP address and I have multiple computers I want to connect.
Someone told me that I could use a router in this situation. Giving all
the computers behind the router fake IP addresses. So my question is can
I take a linux box turn it into a router and connect all my computers to
the one IP address? And if not is there anyway I can do it?
================== Posted via SearchLinux ==================
http://www.searchlinux.com
------------------------------
From: Gustin Kiffney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Setting up a Network with Win 95 & 98
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1999 21:27:09 GMT
[posted and mailed]
check out
http://metalab.unc.edu/pub/Linux/docs/HOWTO/mini/Diald
for getting the Linux box to dial the Internet on demand,
and
http://metalab.unc.edu/pub/Linux/docs/HOWTO/mini/IP-Masquerade
for ways to share one dialup connection to the Internet among
several networked machines.
If you're having trouble getting the linux box connected to your ISP,
the PPP and ISP-Hookup Howtos and mini-Howtos that you'll find there
will help.
Enable routing on your linux box:
echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward
(might need to put this in /etc/rc.d/rc.local if ip_forward is
0 by default)
and tell the Windows machines that the IP address of the Linux
box is their gateway to the Internet.
To speed things up even more you can investigate running a caching-only
DNS on the Linux box, and running Squid on the linux box to cache
sites that are frequently looked up (in that case you set the
Netscape/IE browsers on the Windows machines to use the Linux
box as a 'proxy'). We do this here and it keeps a number of Internet
users pretty happy as long as no one is downloading Quake.
"PTMG" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello All!
>
> We are trying to setup a network where the Linux machine (version 6.0
RH) is
> the gateway to the Internet. We have 10 computers with Win 95 or 98
on them
> that we wish to be able to access the Linux computer in order to set
up the
> network.
>
> The network card we have is a 3COM 3c509 card, and as far as I can
tell, it
> is installed properly onto the Linux machine. My question is: What
do I do
> next? I am not that familiar with setting up a network, but I
figured if I
> can setup Linux and get it to work, I must not be doing too badly :-)
>
> Any ideas / suggestions or links to proper documentation would be
greatly
> appreciated. Respond to the group or to [EMAIL PROTECTED] to
get me
> directly. Thanks in advace!
>
> Darryl
>
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
------------------------------
From: Gustin Kiffney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Jserv and Apache
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1999 21:32:41 GMT
[posted and mailed]
My guess is that all your Apache setup info is contained in the
*.conf files in /etc/httpd/conf. Back those up, as well as the
contents of the directory pointed to by /etc/httpd/modules
and you should be able to get things running again. Yes, 'make install'
will overwrite the original Apache files. But you can restore things
by reinstalling Apache from the .rpm (perhaps using --force) and
then restoring your *.conf files.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Sherman Tsang) wrote:
> I am using RH 5.2 and when i first installed it, it included version
> 1.3.3 of Apache on it.With many days of work and frustration i finally
> manged to get mod_perl installed, and executing perl scripts over the
> webserver to boot.
>
> Anyway, now i want to install Apache Jserv on Apache so that i can run
> servelts on my webserver as well. The only problem is that i want
> Jserv compiled right into Apache 1.3.6. I have the source, i have the
> JDK, and the JSK installed and ready to go, and this time i am hoping
> to compile mod_perl into Apache as well.
>
> Here is my problem: i am not sure what will happen if i compile and
> install Apache and then mod_perl does not work afterwards. I MUST have
> at least mod_perl working on this machine. Will the new installation
> somehow replace the old installation of Apache? Is there some kind of
> backup i can make of all the files/changes that i have made to the
> original installation done by RedHat install (by rpm i'm assuming)?
> And will doing a "make install" from the new source installation of
> Apache REPLACE the old files?
>
> thanks for any help that can be given..
>
> Sherman
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
------------------------------
From: Roy Grimm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Setting up a Network with Win 95 & 98
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1999 16:06:16 -0500
PTMG wrote:
>
> Hello All!
>
> We are trying to setup a network where the Linux machine (version 6.0 RH) is
> the gateway to the Internet. We have 10 computers with Win 95 or 98 on them
> that we wish to be able to access the Linux computer in order to set up the
> network.
What do you mean by "access the Linux computer in order to set up the
network"? Do you want to use the Linux system to allocate IP addresses
for the Windoze boxes? Do you want to use the Linux system to be a
gateway to a dedicated internet connection? Do you want to have the
Linux system authenticate users?
> The network card we have is a 3COM 3c509 card, and as far as I can tell, it
> is installed properly onto the Linux machine. My question is: What do I do
> next? I am not that familiar with setting up a network, but I figured if I
> can setup Linux and get it to work, I must not be doing too badly :-)
Good. You've taken your first step into a larger world...
> Any ideas / suggestions or links to proper documentation would be greatly
> appreciated. Respond to the group or to [EMAIL PROTECTED] to get me
> directly. Thanks in advace!
Try the documentation at http://www.linux.org/help/index.html to find
information on doing what you want.
>
> Darryl
Best of luck,
Roy Grimm
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: !! HELP !! Sendmail v8.8.7 : Linux RH5.2 POP/SMTP server on an ADSL connex
questions...
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1999 22:23:07 GMT
i am attempting to setup a Linux RH5.2 box as a POP/SMTP server on an
ADSL connection (512k). i set up the box with the default server
settings, which gave me the default install of Sendmail v8.8.7.
i have made the changes to my sendmail.cw to reflect all the addresses
i want answered, as well as the /etc/aliases file -- but i still can't
receive any mail (i can send all i want out to the Internet and it
will send mail locally from user to user within the machine.
anyone willing to help? TIA
please respond via email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Cliff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: 3c509
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1999 17:51:16 GMT
Does it work in DOS/Win? If so, the problem may be plug and pray. There
is a DOS executable on the 3Com disk that you can use to disable PnP. Then
set the NIC config manually.
--
-Cliff
Views expressed are my own and not necessarily those of my employer
Concordia Net, Inc. When replying via email please use; cwheat at concordia
dot net not
root@localhost
Matt Menze wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>
>I am having trouble getting my 3c509B ethernet card to be recognized by
>Linux.
------------------------------
From: Helmut Artmeier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: a really hard "net"work problem
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1999 08:20:53 +0200
Hi out there!!
i am working on a Linux/IrDA problem (IrLAN, IrCOMM, IrLPT....) and i am
using dag brattli's irdadump for debugging...
09:02:09.620264 xid:cmd 0xffffffff < 0xd152961e S=6 0
09:02:09.690178 xid:cmd 0xffffffff < 0xd152961e S=6 1
09:02:09.750173 xid:cmd 0xffffffff < 0xd152961e S=6 2
09:02:09.820145 xid:cmd 0xffffffff < 0xd152961e S=6 3
09:02:09.880370 xid:cmd 0xffffffff < 0xd152961e S=6 4
09:02:09.880676 xid:rsp 0x00005690 > 0xd152961e S=6 4 LnxMachine
hint=0d00 [ PnP Computer Printer ]
09:02:09.970153 xid:cmd 0xffffffff < 0xd152961e S=6 5
09:02:10.060239 xid:cmd 0xffffffff < 0xd152961e S=6 * Sim1-Client
hint=8404 [ Computer IrCOMM ]
09:02:10.100803 snrm:cmd ca=0xfe pf=1 0x00005690 < 0xd152961e
new-ca=0xe6
09:02:10.101164 ua:rsp ca=0xe6 pf=1 0x00005690 > 0xd152961e
09:02:10.101349 ua:rsp ca=0xe6 pf=1 0x00005690 > 0xd152961e
09:02:10.410419 rr:cmd < ca=0xe6 pf=1 nr=0
09:02:10.410742 rr:rsp > ca=0xe6 pf=1 nr=0
09:02:10.430366 i:cmd < ca=0xe6 pf=1 nr=0 ns=0 LM slsap=0x03 dlsap=0x00
CONN_CMD
09:02:10.430721 rr:rsp > ca=0xe6 pf=1 nr=1
09:02:10.450332 rr:cmd < ca=0xe6 pf=1 nr=0
09:02:10.450621 rr:rsp > ca=0xe6 pf=1 nr=1
09:02:10.470325 rr:cmd < ca=0xe6 pf=1 nr=0
09:02:10.470615 rr:rsp > ca=0xe6 pf=1 nr=1
09:02:10.490329 rr:cmd < ca=0xe6 pf=1 nr=0
09:02:10.490617 rr:rsp > ca=0xe6 pf=1 nr=1
09:02:10.510326 rr:cmd < ca=0xe6 pf=1 nr=0
09:02:10.510616 rr:rsp > ca=0xe6 pf=1 nr=1
09:02:10.530327 rr:cmd < ca=0xe6 pf=1 nr=0
09:02:10.530619 rr:rsp > ca=0xe6 pf=1 nr=1
09:02:10.600323 rr:cmd < ca=0xe6 pf=1 nr=0
...
...
...
09:02:16.140711 ua:rsp ca=0xe6 pf=1 0x00005690 > 0xd152961e
09:02:17.070488 snrm:cmd ca=0xfe pf=1 0x00005690 < 0xd152961e
new-ca=0xc0
09:02:17.070888 ua:rsp ca=0xc0 pf=1 0x00005690 > 0xd152961e
09:02:17.071076 ua:rsp ca=0xc0 pf=1 0x00005690 > 0xd152961e
09:02:30.120204 xid:cmd 0xffffffff < 0xd152961e S=6 1
09:02:30.180150 xid:cmd 0xffffffff < 0xd152961e S=6 2
09:02:30.250359 xid:cmd 0xffffffff < 0xd152961e S=6 3
09:02:30.250670 xid:rsp 0x00005690 > 0xd152961e S=6 3 LnxMachine
hint=0d00 [ PnP Computer Printer ]
is anyone out there on earth, who can explain me this debugging
information. maybe someone knows irdadump and all possible output
messages...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Raymonds Doetjes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: ipautofw
Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1999 00:39:58 +0200
If you wanna use portforwarding than i suggest you use
rinetd
Wich is the best ip portforwarding at this moment.
Ipportfw in the kernel is still pretty buggy and considerd alpha in my eyes.
Raymond
Michael Pastushkov wrote:
> Hi Everybody
>
> I'm trying to find a source (or i386 bin) for ipautofw / ipportfw. The ftp
> address in kernel's help doesn't contain anything. Where is it ? Please
> point me email (if it's not very big) to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Thanks a lot
> Michael
------------------------------
From: Florian Lorenzen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Can't telnet myself
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1999 18:20:53 +0100
Where do I get tcpdcheck from, it's not included in my RH 5.2
tcp_wrappers-package.
Can I download it somewehere?
By the way, tcpdmatch, started with
> tcpdmatch in.telnetd 127.0.0.1
made the following output:
client: adress 127.0.0.1
server: process in.telnetd
matched: /etc/hosts.allow line 9
access: granted.
That doesn't seem wrong to me at all, neverthelesse, I can't telnet
myself. So, something must be wrong, with my network-configuration.
Perhaps, somebody knows something else.
Thanks.
Thomas Zajic wrote:
>
> On Tue, 03 Aug 1999 11:20:02 +0100, Florian Lorenzen wrote:
>
> > Well, the sense of telnetting myself is just to test whether my network,
> > inetd and tcpd-daemons work.
> > I can ping other hosts and I can ping myself, and I can access the
> > Apache running on my Linux-box from other hosts of my network and from
> > the Linux-box itself. But this all I can do, I can't ftp myself or from
> > antoher host and I can't access the nameserver with nslookup. What I
> > suspect is, that lots of ports are locked for some reason. And I don't
> > know how to fix that.
>
> Are you sure that your /etc/hosts.{allow|deny} are set up
> properly? This can be tricky at times ... try checking your
> setup with 'tcpdcheck' and 'tcpdmatch', they are part of the
> TCP wrappers distribution (in Slackware, they live in
> /usr/sbin/real-daemon-dir). If 'tcpdcheck' reports errors,
> have a look at 'man 5 hosts_access' and 'man 5 hosts_options'.
>
> HTH,
> Thomas
> --
> =--- Thomas Zajic aka ZlatkO ThE GoDFatheR, Vienna/Austria ---=
> =-- "It is not easy to cut through a human head with a hacksaw." M.C. --=
> =-- Posted with Free Agent 1.11/32 running on Linux 2.0.37/Wine-990731 --=
> =--- Spam-proof e-mail: thomas(DOT)zajic(AT)teleweb(DOT)at ---=
------------------------------
From: "Romiko" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Engineer
Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 00:15:18 +0200
I am a Microsoft Engineer and am sick of it, I have worked with Linux and
awk programming fpr two months know, how can I get to a high level in Linux
Engineering QUICKLY as I learn fast?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andy McFadden)
Subject: SOLUTION: netatalk and the dreaded nbp_rgstr
Date: 1 Aug 1999 21:28:22 GMT
In article <7nri7v$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Andy McFadden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I've installed netatalk-1.4b2+asun2.1.3-4.i386.rpm under Red Hat 6.0 using
>GnoRPM. No problems there. However, several seconds after the system
>comes up, I get:
>
>nbp_rgstr: Connection timed out
>Can't register quake:Workstation@*
>nbp_rgstr: Connection timed out
>Can't register quake:netatalk@*
Michael Casteel pointed me in the right direction. I have an Ascend
Pipeline 25 that I use to bridge into work. During the AppleTalk init
stuff, it sends out some messages that wake up the connection. When it
goes looking for "rtmp_packet router"s, it finds one, and tries to do
something clever. This cleverness fails, probably because the Pipeline 25
is configured to ignore AppleTalk traffic (to prevent broadcasts from
holding the connection up unnecessarily).
By unplugging the LAN or WAN connection from the Pipeline 25, I was able
to go from this:
Aug 1 14:07:58 quake kernel: NET4: AppleTalk 0.18 for Linux NET4.0
Aug 1 14:07:58 quake atalkd[478]: restart (1.4b2+asun2.1.3)
Aug 1 14:07:58 quake rc: Starting linuxconf succeeded
Aug 1 14:07:58 quake rc: Starting local succeeded
Aug 1 14:07:59 quake atalkd[478]: zip_getnetinfo for eth0
Aug 1 14:08:08 quake atalkd[478]: zip_getnetinfo for eth0
Aug 1 14:08:15 quake atalkd[478]: zip_getnetinfo for eth0
Aug 1 14:08:18 quake atalkd[478]: zip_getnetinfo for eth0
Aug 1 14:08:25 quake last message repeated 4 times
Aug 1 14:08:28 quake atalkd[478]: config for no router
Aug 1 14:08:29 quake atalkd[478]: ready 0/0/0
Aug 1 14:08:29 quake atalk: atalkd startup succeeded
Aug 1 14:08:33 quake atalkd[478]: rtmp_packet router has become available
Aug 1 14:08:33 quake atalkd[478]: zip_getnetinfo for eth0
Aug 1 14:08:44 quake last message repeated 6 times
Aug 1 14:08:45 quake atalk: papd startup succeeded
Aug 1 14:08:45 quake papd[634]: restart (1.4b2+asun2.1.3)
Aug 1 14:08:45 quake atalkd[478]: zip_getnetinfo for eth0
Aug 1 14:08:45 quake atalk: afpd startup succeeded
Aug 1 14:08:48 quake atalkd[478]: zip_getnetinfo for eth0
Aug 1 14:08:54 quake last message repeated 3 times
Aug 1 14:08:55 quake afpd[645]: Can't register quake:AFPServer@*
Aug 1 14:08:55 quake afpd[645]: ASIP started on 172.17.131.58:548(0) (1.4b2+asu
n2.1.3)
to this:
Aug 1 14:04:59 quake kernel: NET4: AppleTalk 0.18 for Linux NET4.0
Aug 1 14:04:59 quake atalkd[472]: restart (1.4b2+asun2.1.3)
Aug 1 14:04:59 quake rc: Starting linuxconf succeeded
Aug 1 14:04:59 quake rc: Starting local succeeded
Aug 1 14:05:00 quake atalkd[472]: zip_getnetinfo for eth0
Aug 1 14:05:09 quake atalkd[472]: zip_getnetinfo for eth0
Aug 1 14:05:19 quake atalkd[472]: zip_getnetinfo for eth0
Aug 1 14:05:29 quake atalkd[472]: config for no router
Aug 1 14:05:30 quake atalkd[472]: ready 0/0/0
Aug 1 14:05:30 quake atalk: atalkd startup succeeded
Aug 1 14:05:42 quake atalk: papd startup succeeded
Aug 1 14:05:43 quake papd[533]: restart (1.4b2+asun2.1.3)
Aug 1 14:05:43 quake atalk: afpd startup succeeded
Aug 1 14:05:49 quake afpd[544]: quake:AFPServer@* started on 65280.77:128
(1.4b2+asun2.1.3)
Aug 1 14:05:49 quake afpd[544]: ASIP started on 172.17.131.58:548(1)
(1.4b2+asun2.1.3)
If this router stuff is only checked when the system boots, it might explain
why some people experience a situation where their server runs fine for a
long time, then starts failing when they reboot. Something appeared on the
network since the last boot that confuses atalkd during initialization.
--
Send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andy McFadden)
CD-Recordable FAQ - http://www.fadden.com/cdrfaq/ (a/k/a www.spies.com/~fadden)
Fight Internet Spam - http://spam.abuse.net/spam/ & news.admin.net-abuse.email
------------------------------
From: Raymonds Doetjes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: more than 1 ethernet card in a box?
Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1999 00:24:40 +0200
Questions are never stupid answer on the other hand can be stupid :)
The reason to add several network adapters in a system, is that it can
function ass a router between two or even 15 different network segments. A
system with more then one nic is called a multi homed host.
Most firewalls use 2 NICs, one for the evil outside. Then there are some
firewall rules to keep the bad guiys (hopfully) out. And then it connects to
the local network. SO you can also use it as a extra buffer zone.
Routing example.
Think that you have a 3 story building every story has its own network. And
now those people on the 1st floor like to communicate with the people on the
third floor. Without a central router wich connects to all these networks
this is impossible. When you install a server that has 3 NIC each connecting
one of those subnets. Now that multi homed host routes the traffic from
subnet/floor1 to subnet/floor3 and vice versa.
Raymond
System User wrote:
> I know this is a stupid question.. but what advantages does having more
> than 1 ethernet cards in a linux box provide? I read about a lot of people
> using like 15 cards in a box.. what's the point?
>
> Sorry if this is a stupid question :)
>
> Thanks
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Zajic)
Subject: Re: Can't telnet myself
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1999 21:48:17 GMT
On Tue, 03 Aug 1999 18:41:03 GMT, Thomas Zajic wrote:
> Sorry, it was a typo - it's actually called 'tcdpchk'. If
Damn, it's not my day today - let me try again, maybe
without a typo for a change: 'tcpdchk'. So there. ;-)
Thomas
--
=--- Thomas Zajic aka ZlatkO ThE GoDFatheR, Vienna/Austria ---=
=-- "It is not easy to cut through a human head with a hacksaw." M.C. --=
=-- Posted with Free Agent 1.11/32 running on Linux 2.0.37/Wine-990731 --=
=--- Spam-proof e-mail: thomas(DOT)zajic(AT)teleweb(DOT)at ---=
------------------------------
From: Tobias Goerig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: redhat.kernel.general,redhat.networking.general
Subject: Real NAT on RH60 ???
Date: 3 Aug 1999 17:30:35 GMT
Hello evereybody
I want to use Linux as a Firewall with ipchains.
I need full NAT-Support and not only masquerading.
That means that i don't want to hide several IP's behind the Firewall IP
(1:n) but a full n:m NAT-Translation.
For example:
intern IP extern IP
192.168.1.42 --> 193.42.1.42
192.168.1.43 --> 193.42.1.43
192.168.1.42 <-- 193.42.1.42
192.168.1.43 <-- 193.42.1.43
Some poeple say you should use ipmasqadm to solve this problem, but
this programm seems to redirect the packets and the dokumentation says
that the extern sender only sees the connection to the firewall but the
intern reciever it seems to be a direct connection to the real sender.
But when using real NAT the sender should not see firewall.
Can anybody can give me a hint, where I can find a tool for implementing
NAT on my Server.
There is a NAT option in the Kernel, but how can I use it?
I'm using RedHat 6.0 with 2.2.5 or 2.2.10 kernel.
Thank You for your answers !!!
Tobias Goerig
================== Posted via SearchLinux ==================
http://www.searchlinux.com
------------------------------
From: Ralf Gerlich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: virtualhosts for ftpd?
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1999 19:51:46 +0200
Hi!
As far as I know the FTP protocol doesn't support something like Virtual
Server Hosting. HTTP/1.1 does by transmitting the name of the server to
access in the request header. There are three possibilities to solve
this problem, where two of them involve a second IP-address:
1. IP-Aliasing.
IP-Aliasing lets you have more than one IP-address on one NIC. For this
you have to enable "Network aliasing" and "IP-aliasing" in the kernel
setup. Then you can configure eth0 to have the first IP-address and
eth0:0 to have the second address. This looks about like that:
ifconfig eth0 <first IP> up
ifconfig eth0:0 <second IP> up
You can configure many more sub-interfaces like this. I don't know how
many per NIC but I think one might be enough for you for the moment.
Anyway if you want more, just do the same with eth0:1, eth0:2 a.s.o.
2. A second NIC
This is nearly the same as above but would not use IP-Aliasing but a
second NIC. This would cost more and is thus a worse solution.
3. Different usernames
This solution may work well if the users accessing ftp.mynet.com are
different from those accessing otherftp.mynet.com. It may get a bit ugly
if they are the same.
Let's say user1 and user2 are accessing ftp.mynet.com and user3 and
user4 are accessing otherftp.mynet.com
Then you can configure the users user1 and user2 to have the home
directory /home/ftp/ftp and user3 and user4 to have the home directory
/home/ftp/otherftp. Now you can add user1 and user2 to one usergroup and
make /home/ftp/ftp solely accessible by that group and do the same with
user3, user4 and /home/ftp/otherftp
In the situation that user1 and user2 should be able to access
ftp.mynet.com _and_ otherftp.mynet.com, you have to create two usernames
per user: user1 and otheruser1, user2 and otheruser2 for example. Then
you perform the ritual as above.
Hope this helps,
Ralf
------------------------------
From: "Romiko" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Connect to Windows NT over telephone line
Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 00:19:47 +0200
Make sure to set up RAS on NT via Network Neighborhood, which is configured
to dial out and recieve calls, make sure to start the RAS service as it is
default to manual, use slip as the line protocol, configure your NT Server
to assign users with ip address (Network Neighborhors, Services, RAS,
network tab) also enable any authentification unlesws Linux supports CHAP .
Cliff wrote in message ...
> Try the HOWTO's; Ethernet, PPP, and Samba. They should be in
>/usr/doc/HOWTO directory (assuming RH).
>
>--
>-Cliff
>Views expressed are my own and not necessarily those of my employer
>Concordia Net, Inc. When replying via email please use; cwheat at concordia
>dot net not
>root@localhost
>
>Zoltan Perhacs wrote in message <7ns78m$c1d$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>>Can someone tell me how can i connect from my linux box
>>to a windows nt server over a modem and use its shares ?
>>I'm looking for detailed informations.
>>
>>Thank you !
>>
>> Zoltan Perhacs
>>
>>
>>
>
>
------------------------------
From: Raymonds Doetjes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: linux and win98 mails
Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1999 00:31:48 +0200
I suggest you ca=hanges these lines in your sendmail
Cwhostname
Cj$w.domainname.com
Perhaps even Dmyourdomain.com (I always use this)
Install a DNS server
Install a pop server and you are done.
COnfigure your ip-up scripts in yout /etc/ppp directory to run sendmail -q
(wait about 30 seconds before doing that). sleep 30 before the sendmail line
will do the trock.
Raymond
KiloMan wrote:
> We have a RED-HAT 6.0 Machine and A windows 98 machine connected together.
> We have only ONE POP account and we like to have the setup like following:
>
> 1. though not online all the messages sent from WIN98 machine to be sent to
> Linux machine and spooled. When the linux machine goes online all the
> messages must be sent.
>
> 2. when downloading mails , all the mails must be stored in the linux
> machine and later the mails should be seen by win98 offiline.
>
> 3. internal E-Mail messages from linux to win98 and win98 to linux must be
> sent/reecived.
>
> Please send us the methods and codes by which this can be done .
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
