DJA wrote:
James G. Sack (jim) wrote:
Ralph Shumaker wrote:
James G. Sack (jim) wrote:
nfs was not enabled. Stopped nfslock (which stopped rpc.statd). And
stopped rpcbind. Disabled them and saved.
I don't know if they are related, but rpcgssd is enabled and
running, as
well as rpcidmapd.
I guess those are all related (because of the rpc prefix), and all
unnecessary in your setup.
I believe both of those are required by NFSv4. If you're not using v4
I don't think you need them running.
.. udp 0.0.0.0:631 0.0.0.0:* 2563/cupsd
If you have a network-connected printer, then cupsd is most likely
essential, but if you have a direct-connect (eg, parallel, usb), then
I'm not sure whether it is still needed or not -- I suspect it
might be,
though. Let us know what you find out. ;-) I would definitely not want
any firewall forwarding enabled on port 631!
How could I be certain. Test print before and after disabling?
Printing before, worked fine. Then I disabled. Tried to print. The
printer queue(sp?) showed the job, but didn't seem to want to print.
Right-clicking on the job had all options grayed out except for Cancel,
but selecting Cancel would not work until I started cupsd back up. So
it seems to be necessary.
So what should I do about port 631?
Google-poking shows some clue that it has to do with making (and/or
seeing?) announcements of printer availability on your local network.
Also that it seems to be controlled by
/etc/cups/cupsd
at the lines near
# Show shared printers on the local network.
You might experiment with these, because it seems you have no need for a
udp port being open on 631
http://localhost:631/ is the CUPS management page. This is a GUI
within which you can manage all CUPS printer tasks.
Not being obvious to all, this perhaps means that I *do* need a udp port
open on 631?
Mine is 68.183.yyy.zzz which doesn't resemble yours. My hostname
currently is netblock-68-183-yyy-zzz, kinda like what Cox does IIRC.
Oh, that is not a private IP address, it is a public one (accessible
from the internet), so you are right to avoid plastering it all around.
It is visible in your email headers -- but there's not anything you can
do about that, I believe.
So your DSL modem is not doing any NAT.
==> Somebody else will have to explain what is going on. I'd like to
know more about it myself. Maybe that implies there is no
It depends on what DSL modem you have. Some have built-in firewall and
NAT capability, some just firewall, and some nothing. Since you didn't
say anything about a discrete hardware firewall, I assume you don't
have one between your DSL modem and your computer. If this is the
case, and you are not at least running a Iptables or similar, and your
modem has no firewalling capability, I strongly recommend you get one.
dsl-line
DSL-2320B
ethernet-cable
eth0
So I either need to learn IPtables or put in a firewall device?
--
I don't see any use in spelling a word right, and never did. I mean I
don't see any use in having a uniform and arbitrary way of spelling
words. We might as well make all our clothes alike and cook all dishes
alike.
--Mark Twain
--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
