On Thu, 10 Feb 2005, Ilia Chipitsine wrote:

Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2005 11:19:57 +0500 (YEKT)
From: Ilia Chipitsine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: JLB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Samba] Firewall piercing - The Specified network name is no
    longer available.

pptp/vpn client is included in windows distribution as well.

Is it an optional install?

no, it is included by default.


client is pretty well tested and works reasonably good since win95osr2.

How does one use it?

pptp is "ppp over gre", in windows terms workstation just establishes
"dialup" connection to pptp server, if you have pptp/vpn server right between your internet and intranet, so, clients from both segments will
be able to connect to it and IP will go over private subnet. that is what we use for almost 2 years.



Start, Run, ...what?


so, it is already installed on "ANY Windoze" :-)

Please read my points on this sort of "solution" in the past. The whole
REASON I want to use Plain Vanilla SMB is so I can walk up to ANY Windoze
machine on the entire flippin' Internet and go:

Start
Run
\\IP_ADDRESS\sharename
(username)
(password)

POOF.

If I have to install anything, the whole point is moot.

On Thu, 10 Feb 2005, Ilia Chipitsine wrote:

Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2005 09:58:32 +0500 (YEKT)
From: Ilia Chipitsine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: JLB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Samba] Firewall piercing - The Specified network name is no
    longer available.

you can setup PPTP/VPN server and this eliminates need of using NAT.

Hi all.

I'm trying to set up one of my Unix machines at home so I can access my
stuff there via SMB from the Internet at large (read: from Windows-using
clients').

I'm behind two NATting devices-- the lame-p Prestige DSL modem provided by
Sprint DSL (a.k.a. Earthlink?) and a more typical home DSL/cable gateway
device.

I've poked holes in BOTH of these devices on ports 137, 138, 139 AND 445.
Only port 139 actually responds to TCP connections (well, only port 139
accepts a telnet, even from localhost.

See:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
-bash-2.05b# telnet localhost 137
Trying ::1...
telnet: connect to address ::1: Connection refused
Trying 127.0.0.1...
telnet: connect to address 127.0.0.1: Connection refused
-bash-2.05b# telnet localhost 138
Trying ::1...
telnet: connect to address ::1: Connection refused
Trying 127.0.0.1...
telnet: connect to address 127.0.0.1: Connection refused
-bash-2.05b# telnet localhost 139
Trying ::1...
telnet: connect to address ::1: Connection refused
Trying 127.0.0.1...
Connected to localhost.
Escape character is '^]'.
^]
telnet> close
Connection closed.
-bash-2.05b# telnet localhost 445
Trying ::1...
telnet: connect to address ::1: Connection refused
Trying 127.0.0.1...
telnet: connect to address 127.0.0.1: Connection refused
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

It should go without saying that this machine's Samba shares work
PERFECTLY WELL within the LAN. ;)

Now, from the outside, I can telnet to port 139 on the machine just fine,
through both NAT devices. However, when I go Start, Run,
\\x.y.z.a\sharename (where "x.y.z.a" is the IP address-- not the FQDN-- of
the machine), Windows vomits up this unhelpful message:


-------------------------------------------------- \\x.y.z.a\sharename The specified network name is no longer available. --------------------------------------------------

See:

http://jlb.twu.net/tmp/unhelpful.png

Any ideas? The client machine runs Windows 2000 Pro.

--
J. L. Blank, Systems Administrator, twu.net
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions:  https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba



-- J. L. Blank, Systems Administrator, twu.net



-- J. L. Blank, Systems Administrator, twu.net

--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions:  https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba

Reply via email to