On Sun, 2001-12-02 at 17:36, David Irvine wrote: > On Sun, 2001-12-02 at 17:12, Welby McRoberts wrote: > > On Fri, 2001-11-23 at 11:47, David Irvine wrote: > > > On Fri, 2001-11-23 at 11:26, Mark Robinson wrote: > > > > Hello Welby, > > > > > > > > Friday, 23 November 2001, you wrote: > > > > > > > > WM> Hello again everyone. > > > > > > > > WM> Two things really. > > > > > > > > WM> firstly i've got linux working on my laptop now (the one with the dodgy > > > > WM> hard disc). Mandrake linux would install fine(ish) and just would not > > > > WM> boot but i tried red hat which is working fine now (appart from some > > > > WM> immense slow down when using an openGL program....i've got one of those > > > > WM> rage mobility cards in the laptop which does support opengl hardware > > > > WM> acceleration thingy so i don't know why its slow!) > > > If your running X 4.x make sure you are using DRI (Direct Rendering > > > Interface) which can really speed up graphics on X, don't know if its > > > related to opengl, but i've had good results since enabling it on my > > > ati and my matrox card based machines. Go into the XF86Config file > > > (Which can be in a whole miriad of places but try /etc/X11 first) > > > and look for a line loading the DRI module in the modules section and > > > add one if there isnt. (Make sure you back up XF86Config multiple times > > > with obscure names in case it all goes pear shaped) > > i'm not running X 4, is there a quick (and prefreably easy )way to > > upgrade to X 4 ? > > > > You either need to build from source, (Easier than it looks) or download > rpm's from www.xfree86.org quite a hefty download either way but it can > be worth it. I think there is dri support for xf3.x as well but im not > sure how you set it up. > Ok, I'll give xfree86 4 a whirl (i'll just get the rpms cos i'm feeling lazy atm :-) )
> > > > WM> secondly. I unfortunatly have to use AOL to connect to the internet :-( > > > > WM> (it's my mum she like the colours or summat, i hate the need to use > > > > WM> there software, the ammount of spam, the ammount of adverts etc etc) > > > > WM> anyway :-), I have wingate running a NAT on my local network (wingate is > > > > WM> running on the computer 'server' (192.168.0.1)). I am wondering how i > > > > WM> would set up linux on my laptop (welby (192.168.0.4)) so that i could > > > > WM> connect to the internet using nat. > > > > > > > > Yes, wingate is also a web proxy so you could try adding 192.168.0.1 > > > > (and whatever port it's listening on) to your favourite browsers proxy > > > > settings. That will give you browser based web access only, but it's > > > > an idea if the default gateway stuff doesn't work for some reason... > > > > > > > > Mark > > > > > > > If you want 'real' internet access you can add the default gateway by > > > doing something like this. > > > > By Real I guess you mean NAT? > Yes. > > > > > > > route add default gw 192.168.0.1 > > > which will route packets via your gateway which should then munge them > > > with nat and kick them out the modem then unmunge then back to your > > > linux box when they come back. Thats the theory anyway. > > > > I ran the command about (as root) and when i typed in 'route' i got the > > following output > > > > > > Kernel IP routing table > > Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface > > 192.168.0.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 > > 172.16.12.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 vmnet8 > > 127.0.0.0 * 255.0.0.0 U 0 0 0 lo > > default 192.168.0.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0 > > > > unfortunatly its still not working. It is definatly a problem on this > > machine because it is working on my other client computer. > > > > The routing table looks fine. > > can you ping 192.168.0.1? If not then try again, but also have a > tcpdump -i eth0 at the same time yup, it's pinging it fine, > ping 192.168.0.1 & tcpdump -i eth0 should do the trick, and have a look > and see whats going on. If you see Who has 192.168.0.1 tell 192.168.0.4 > but no response. then check on the gateway machine if you recieve that > request and check the network card on that machine is recieving > packets. i can comunitcate using the proxy server built into wingate but i can use nat atm. Heres the output for the tcp dump thingy 18:21:15.360289 192.168.0.2 > 192.168.0.1: icmp: echo request (DF) 18:21:15.360289 192.168.0.1 > 192.168.0.2: icmp: echo reply (DF) 18:21:15.360289 192.168.0.2.1026 > 192.168.0.1.domain: 64453+ PTR? 1.0.168.192.in-addr.arpa. (42) (DF) 18:21:15.380289 192.168.0.1.domain > 192.168.0.2.1026: 64453* 0/0/0 (42) 18:21:15.380289 192.168.0.2.1026 > 192.168.0.1.domain: 64454+ PTR? 2.0.168.192.in-addr.arpa. (42) (DF) 18:21:15.400289 192.168.0.1.domain > 192.168.0.2.1026: 64454* 0/0/0 (42) 18:21:16.360289 192.168.0.2 > 192.168.0.1: icmp: echo request (DF) 18:21:16.360289 192.168.0.1 > 192.168.0.2: icmp: echo reply (DF) 18:21:17.360289 192.168.0.2 > 192.168.0.1: icmp: echo request (DF) 18:21:17.360289 192.168.0.1 > 192.168.0.2: icmp: echo reply (DF) 18:21:18.360289 192.168.0.2 > 192.168.0.1: icmp: echo request (DF) 18:21:18.360289 192.168.0.1 > 192.168.0.2: icmp: echo reply (DF) 18:21:19.360289 192.168.0.2 > 192.168.0.1: icmp: echo request (DF) 18:21:19.360289 192.168.0.1 > 192.168.0.2: icmp: echo reply (DF) 18:21:20.360289 192.168.0.2 > 192.168.0.1: icmp: echo request (DF) 18:21:20.360289 192.168.0.1 > 192.168.0.2: icmp: echo reply (DF) > If you get a ping response the next step is to ping a real internet > address that is working and see if that works, if so it is most likely > name resolution that is the problem. the DNS thing is fine. cos when i run dig www.abdn.ac.uk (for instance) it pauses for a few secons and outputs ; <<>> DiG 9.1.3 <<>> www.abdn.ac.uk ;; global options: printcmd ;; Got answer: ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 9941 ;; flags: qr aa rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 0 ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;www.abdn.ac.uk. IN A ;; ANSWER SECTION: www.abdn.ac.uk. 0 IN A 139.133.7.20 ;; Query time: 81 msec ;; SERVER: 192.168.0.1#53(192.168.0.1) ;; WHEN: Sun Dec 2 18:23:29 2001 ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 62 > if you don't get any response from the internet site, check your nat, > when you added the rule did you add it for the interface, or from a > source address. When i try and ping www.abdn.ac.uk it sends the packets but the lights on the hub are showing that the packets don't get picked up by 192.168.0.1 In wingate (the NAT server) is automatically set up so that all local NIC's are added. There are no rules set, appart from that the users 'everyone' can access NAT > also try ping -b 192.168.10.0 and see if you get a response from > anything, that can sometimes help find out what ip's are actually > listening and not ignoring you. note windows doesnt always respond to > broadcast address ping's so don't worry too much if it doesnt work > its sending the packets but.......nothing :( > > > > Remember to add lines in your /etc/resolve.conf for the nameservers so > > > that you can do name lookups from your linux box. > > > > I've done this as well. > > > > > You might want to make sure wingate has correct acl's set up. > > > HTH > > Yeah the ACLs are all fine > > > David > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > http://www.lug.org.uk http://www.linuxportal.co.uk > http://www.linuxjob.co.uk http://www.linuxshop.co.uk > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- ''' (0 0) +----oOO----------(_)-----------------+ | Welby McRoberts | |E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | |MSN : [EMAIL PROTECTED] | |Mobile: 07751 238 390 | +------------------------oOO----------+ |__|__| || || oooO Oooo -------------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.lug.org.uk http://www.linuxportal.co.uk http://www.linuxjob.co.uk http://www.linuxshop.co.uk --------------------------------------------------------------------
