Re: How to Setup Reverse DNS on LAN?

2004-01-26 Thread Stephane Bortzmeyer
On Tue, Dec 09, 2003 at 05:50:25AM -0800,
 Drew Tomlinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote 
 a message of 33 lines which said:

 When connecting via ssh to my FBSD boxes, it takes over a minute
 before the connection is established.  Searching the archives
 suggests that this is due to a failed reverse DNS lookup that must
 time out before connecting.

Probably.

 But 192.168.1.3 does not:
 
 blacksheep host 192.168.1.3
 Host not found, try again.

On FreeBSD 5.1, it appears, speaking both from the man page and from
an actual test, that host does not use /etc/hosts at all. It would be
nice to have a command which uses getaddrinfo() but host does not.

ping would be a better test:

~ % ping localhost
PING fetiche (127.0.0.1): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 127.0.0.1: icmp_seq=0 ttl=64 time=0.253 ms

The name 'fetiche' was found in /etc/hosts.



___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: Router/Gateway

2003-12-12 Thread Stephane Bortzmeyer
On Thu, Dec 11, 2003 at 01:45:56PM +0200,
 Extech [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote 
 a message of 52 lines which said:

 there will also be other machines with fixed IP addresses (not
 192.168.x.x but proper IP's) on this network.

RFC 1918 addresses like 192.168.0.0/16 *are* proper (from the point of
view of the IP stack), they are just not public and hence not globally
unique and not globally routable.

 I assume that I will configure dc0 with my fixed IP, but what do I
 do with lr0?

Configure it with one of the addresses of the other network (the one
which has proper addresses. Assume it is (just an example)
10.1.2.128/25, then you could use 10.1.2.129 (I myself use the
convention that the default router of a network is always the first IP
address of that network).

On Ethernet, you must use one different IP address per interface (on
point to point lines, some routers allow you to have unnumbered
interfaces, not sure that it is true for FreeBSD).

Be sure that your provider routes the above prefix (10.1.2.128/25) to
you, otherwise your machines (except the router) will be able to send
but not to receive.

You can check that from http://www.traceroute.org/.


___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: Why userland , basesystem and Kernel are together?!

2003-12-12 Thread Stephane Bortzmeyer
On Thu, Dec 11, 2003 at 10:00:28AM -0800,
 Allan Bowhill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote 
 a message of 67 lines which said:

 Don't send him away. This is a good question.

I did not want to send anyone away. I was just saying that each
operating system has its own logic, its own philosophy and, while
discussing the pros and cons of these philosophies is very interesting
(but may be off-topic here), in the end, you have to choose one that
pleases you.
 
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: Why userland , basesystem and Kernel are together?!

2003-12-10 Thread Stephane Bortzmeyer
On Tue, Dec 09, 2003 at 01:37:48AM +0200,
 Vahric MUHTARYAN [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote 
 a message of 46 lines which said:

 Why some programs are in base system . What is the meaning of
 Sendmail or SSH in base system . Programs are only executable things
 What is the relation about those programs with base system ?!

With the ideas you have about how an operating system should be
assembled, I suggest that you use Debian URL:http://www.debian.org/
instead of FreeBSD. it is much closer to your philosophy.
 
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: Why userland , basesystem and Kernel are together?!

2003-12-10 Thread Stephane Bortzmeyer
On Tue, Dec 09, 2003 at 03:42:17PM -0500,
 Scott W [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote 
 a message of 104 lines which said:

 1.  Kernel.  Umm, I hope I don't have to expain this one ;-) 

 2.  Core system- This one can likely be argued a bit with bsd (and 

 3.  userland apps- Kernel and core make a rudimentary system, but 

I don't have the Handbook to check and I'm offline at the present time
but I'm suprised. I thought that userland meaned everything which
is not the kernel, including the base system.

What you call userland, everything but the base system, seems to
be what the Handbook calls the ports.
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: Why userland , basesystem and Kernel are together?!

2003-12-10 Thread Stephane Bortzmeyer
On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 02:19:04AM +0100,
 Simon Barner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote 
 a message of 101 lines which said:

 If you have a look at all this, you will easily understand why there
 aren't multiple FreeBSD distributions (like in the Linux world):
 The FreeBSD Project provides more than a kernel - it also maintains
 the base system and almost 1 ported third-party applications (the
 so-called ports collection).

You are comparing apples and oranges. Linux is a kernel, not an
operating system. Distributions is a specially ill-choosen word in
the Linux world. There are several operating systems, Debian, RedHat,
Mandrake, which only have in common to use the Linux kernel. Forget
the word distributions which seems to imply that an operating
system is defined by its kernel.
 
And there are several operating systems based on a BSD kernel, too:
FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD, there is even now a Debian/BSD which uses a
NetBSD kernel instead of Linux.


___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: localhost pingable, inaccessible on browser

2003-12-05 Thread Stephane Bortzmeyer
On Fri, Dec 05, 2003 at 08:58:26AM -0500,
 Marty Landman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote 
 a message of 20 lines which said:

 Like the subject says, I can ping localhost and 127.0.0.1 but can't get to 
 them via lynx.

Error message from lynx?

Or a broken proxy setup:

echo $http_proxy 
 
 /etc/hosts says
 
 ::1 localhost localhost.face2interface.domain
 127.0.0.1   localhost localhost.face2interface.domain

Do you try http://127.0.0.1/ or http://localhost/ ? In the second
case, you may have an IPv6 problem.
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]