Linux-Networking Digest #897, Volume #9 Sat, 16 Jan 99 15:16:02 EST
Contents:
ATT worldnet ??? PPP (Jim Bisnett)
Re: ppp ("William R. Mattil")
securing a linux box (Yan Seiner)
Collisions resolved, but speed problem between u/l and d/l ("Yann Bizeul")
Re: Samba via PPP (Kenny Keslar)
Re: ATT worldnet ??? PPP ("Gary Maculsay")
Re: Help! New user ("Upali Weerasinghe")
Re: Security hole with WU-FTPD (Barry Margolin)
Re: Security hole with WU-FTPD (Barry Margolin)
Re: Security hole with WU-FTPD (Ashok Aiyar)
Re: ppp-2.3.4: CHAP problem (Clifford Kite)
Re: Security hole with WU-FTPD (Barry Margolin)
HELP: virtual hosting, mail, pop3 (David Farber)
PPP Server Questions ("Brian E. Parker")
samba vs. nfs (Bill Dossett)
Re: When I'm online, my hard drive makes noise... ("Charles Stack")
Re: Online with Linux ("Gster")
Austin RR: not working consistently ("David Kerr")
help ("Ajay Garg (From Calvert)")
Re: This is Linux, not Windows, so why not superior flexibility AND idiot-friendly?
("Richard S. Lumpkin")
Re: Network: Can't Ping ("Daniel Goh")
Re: FCS errors: too many? (James Carlson)
Re: IPX problem ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Jim Bisnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: ATT worldnet ??? PPP
Date: 16 Jan 1999 15:51:45 GMT
I just moved back to the states and have an ATT worldnet account. I am
having problems connecting with linux. I can get the phone to dial, and
then have ATT pickup but from there the rest never correctly finishs.
Has anyone had any success with ATT worldnet. Do they us PAP or CHAP? Do
they do anything different than normal? I am using REDHAT 5.1.
Jim
------------------------------
From: "William R. Mattil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: ppp
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 09:50:28 -0600
B Phillips wrote:
>
> Just installed RedHat 5.2 and can connect to my ISP, but can't ping anything
> out on the Net. It seems that my ethernet card is setup as the default
> route.
Don't doubt it. This is probably the second most misunderstood thing
regarding
networking a linux box.
edit /etc/sysconfig/network and remove the two lines resembling:
GATEWAYDEV=eth0
GATEWAY=192.168.60.120
> How do I set ppp0 as the default? I know I did it on my 4.1 installation,
> but don't remember and haven't been able to find in the docs.
>
This is not so cut and dried because their are 40 different ways to get
there, but
my solution was a script (shell) that starts the logon proceedure:
#!/bin/sh
exec /usr/sbin/pppd connect\
'/usr/sbin/chat -v -f /etc/ppp/my-chat-script'\
crtscts modem\
user myname\
domain my.domain.com\
ipcp-accept-local\
ipcp-accept-remote\
defaultroute\
/dev/ttyS1 38400
the statement regarding "defaultroute" is the obvious answer :^)
Hope this helps ...
Regards
Bill
--
William R. Mattil | Fred Astaire wasn't so great.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | Ginger had to do it all backwards
(972) 399-4106 | and... in high heels.
------------------------------
From: Yan Seiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: securing a linux box
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 11:13:13 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
What are some good references for securing a linux server from attacks
via the internet?
I want to block all ports except 22 and 80 on my internet interface, but
want to keep my ability to telnet from the LAN.
TIA,
Yan
------------------------------
From: "Yann Bizeul" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Collisions resolved, but speed problem between u/l and d/l
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 17:40:50 +0100
I resolved the problem with Full Duplex by forcing FD on the NIC, but I have
another question :
Why are my d/l much slowly than my u/l ??? (about 3x)
thanks !
_____________________________________________________
e-mail:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(vers portable : [EMAIL PROTECTED])
HomePage:.......http://perso.club-internet.fr/ybizeul
ICQ:.........................................10482694
__________________ Pentium Toaster __________________
------------------------------
From: Kenny Keslar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Samba via PPP
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 00:33:07 +0900
no need for reboot..
Do this is a dos prompt on Win 95 and possibly 98/NT.
Ip for server = 1.1.1.1
c:
cd c:\windows\
nbtstat -A 1.1.1.1
now look at what is there for group.
edit lmhosts
type in "1.1.1.1 group_name #PRE"
save and exit
nbtstat -R
nbtstat -a group_name
you should see the same as what you saw in nbtstat -A 1.1.1.1
net view \\group_name
select share that you want to use..
net use s: \\group_name\share
or
net use lpt1 \\group_name\printer
BE VERY CAREFULL when running that.. make sure you have passwords otherwise
anyone can use those resourses.
Scott W. Petersen wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Jan 1999 12:18:32 +0200, Ville Nummela <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >On Tue, 12 Jan 1999, Marius Bezuidenhout wrote:
> >
> >> First of all, is it possible to have a Microsoft network type thing
> >> going over a dialup connection?
> >
> >Sure thing. Accessing M$/linux servers from linux through dialup/whatever
> >connection is not a problem. You can use the I-switch to give smbclient
> >the IP address of the server. The other way around is a bit more tricky
> >though (from Windozes). You have to put the IP address to the hosts file
> >(or was it lmhosts? It's been a long time since I've done this :-/ and
> >then you just use the host name just as it was in your local network.
> >
> >--
> > | ViGe / gasp inc. | http://www.lut.fi/~vnummela | [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
> > | IRC natura alienum est! Periculosum est! Delendum est! |
> >
>
> lmhosts
>
> I wish I had the exact parameters.
>
> need the ip address and the name of the samba server. Make sure you do
> a reboot on the win95 machine after changing lmhosts.
>
> Scott
--
===================================================================
Kenny Keslar
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.kfk2.com
2214965 On ICQ
===================================================================
John 3:16
For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only
Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal
life.
===================================================================
------------------------------
From: "Gary Maculsay" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: ATT worldnet ??? PPP
Date: 16 Jan 1999 17:06:50 GMT
Try this link first...
http://www.wurd.com/wurd/software/dialers/linux.html
Cheers!
Jim Bisnett wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>I just moved back to the states and have an ATT worldnet account. I am
>having problems connecting with linux. I can get the phone to dial, and
>then have ATT pickup but from there the rest never correctly finishs.
>Has anyone had any success with ATT worldnet. Do they us PAP or CHAP? Do
>they do anything different than normal? I am using REDHAT 5.1.
>
> Jim
>
------------------------------
From: "Upali Weerasinghe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Help! New user
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 15:36:28 GMT
you can read /usr/doc/HOWTO/ you'll find lots of information. I have setup
Linux box with two network card, using ip masq, dhcpcd, dhcp and DNS, smb,
not a hummma.
That is why we need linux for. enjoy it and help it.
upali
Eugene wrote in message ...
>www.linux.org/help
>
>Ziae wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>>I am new to Linux and need some help! Can anyone can point me in the
>>direction where I can find some help connecting a Linux PC to Windows 95
>>PC via Ethernet.
>>
>>Thanks!!!
>>
>
>
------------------------------
From: Barry Margolin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.security,comp.security.unix,redhat.general,redhat.networking.general,aus.computers.linux
Subject: Re: Security hole with WU-FTPD
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 17:19:46 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
M. Buchenrieder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>No. The entry in the /etc/passwd file had been added _before_ the attack
>could take place. So either the security had been compromised before, then
>the FTP attack would have been useless (since the intruder obviously had
>root access alreeady), or the entry has been made by the sysadmin just
>to _allow_ FTP access with root permissions.
If you read the post, you would know that the second was not what
happened. Later in his post he said that they're still trying to figure
out how the passwd entry got put in, and he asked for advice about that.
The fact that there are other ways to break into the system does not excuse
FTPD from being usable to implement a back-door. Perhaps the compromise of
/etc/passwd happened when the culprit was on-site for some reason (maybe as
a consultant). He might not be able to reproduce those circumstances, but
by leaving a back-door open he has future access.
--
Barry Margolin, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
GTE Internetworking, Powered by BBN, Burlington, MA
*** DON'T SEND TECHNICAL QUESTIONS DIRECTLY TO ME, post them to newsgroups.
Don't bother cc'ing followups to me.
------------------------------
From: Barry Margolin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.security,comp.security.unix,redhat.general,redhat.networking.general,aus.computers.linux
Subject: Re: Security hole with WU-FTPD
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 17:23:05 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
M. Buchenrieder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>You shot yourself into the foot. Setting up an FTP-only account
>with root permissions is as silly as displaying the root password
>at the login screen. Sheesh.
Am I the only one who saw this paragraph in his post:
]We are still working to uncover how the hacker managed to append a
]passwd entry to the /etc/passwd file. (I'm open to suggestions--at the
]time of the attack, bob was set up to be an NFS client but we do not use
]NFS in our domain as so it may not have been configured properly. NFS
]has since been removed).
--
Barry Margolin, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
GTE Internetworking, Powered by BBN, Burlington, MA
*** DON'T SEND TECHNICAL QUESTIONS DIRECTLY TO ME, post them to newsgroups.
Don't bother cc'ing followups to me.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ashok Aiyar)
Crossposted-To:
comp.security,comp.security.unix,redhat.general,redhat.networking.general,aus.computers.linux
Subject: Re: Security hole with WU-FTPD
Date: 16 Jan 1999 17:35:41 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, 15 Jan 1999 16:19:39 -0600,
Daryle Niedermayer ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>Here's how part of the exploit happened:
>
>By adding an entry to the bottom of the passwd file:
>test::0:0:dummyname:/:/bin/bash
>
If it matters any, I just tried this with BeroFTPd-1.2.1, which is
derived from wu-ftpd, and I cannot login as "test".
So if you do use wu-ftpd, and are concerned about a backdoor like this
being left by a cracker, you might consider BeroFTPd. Available from
freshmeat and all the other usual places.
Later,
Ashok
--
Ashok Aiyar, Ph.D.
McArdle Laboratory for Cancer Research
http://aiyar.cjb.net
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Clifford Kite)
Subject: Re: ppp-2.3.4: CHAP problem
Date: 16 Jan 1999 10:50:15 -0600
HELP ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: hi
: I have problem to connect to my ISP which is using CHAP.
: so debuging information looks like..
: Jan 10 05:43:46 darkstar pppd[238]: sent [LCP ConfReq id=0x1
: <magic 0x7623ae84> <pcomp> <accomp>]
: Jan 10 05:43:46 darkstar pppd[238]: rcvd [LCP ConfReq id=0x0
: <asyncmap 0x0> <auth chap 80> <magic 0x5ec1> <pcomp> <accomp>]
: Jan 10 05:43:46 darkstar pppd[238]: sent [LCP ConfRej id=0x0
: <auth chap 80>]
: Jan 10 05:43:46 darkstar pppd[238]: rcvd [LCP ConfAck id=0x1
: <magic 0x7623ae84> <pcomp> <accomp>]
: Jan 10 05:43:46 darkstar pppd[238]: rcvd [LCP TermReq id=0x1
: 00 00 02 dc]
: Jan 10 05:43:46 darkstar pppd[238]: sent [LCP TermAck id=0x1]
: my chap-secrets contains only two line: NT guest
: guest NT
: my ISP expects guest for username and no password.
: I run ppp like "pppd name guest remotename NT /dev/modem 38400 defaultroute"
: I had compiled ppp-2.3.4 with "make CHAPMS=1 USE_CRYPT=1"
: and my options file contains two line: lock and usehostname
: I'm using slackware 3.6.
Since pppd rejects mschap either your chap-secrets file isn't right
or mschap didn't make it into pppd when you compiled.
I would first try adding a third field to chap-secrets, a simple ""
may be appropriate for a case in which no password is required.
The README.MSCHAP80 has an example of what you need for the server name
in chap-secrets when the server is not a domain controller. Search for
"DialupNT" in that file if you think this might apply. Of course the
ppp "name" option must be changed whenever the chap-secrets client name
is changed.
I *think* that it is possible to use "make CHAPMS=1 USE_CRYPT=1" and
have the compile succeed without errors and without mschap if your system
does not have encrypt on it. I knew that there was no encrypt on mine
and got the DES library instead.
If you get the DES library it may be necessary to comment out the line
USE_CRYPT=y in the file pppd/Makefile.linux . The make command then
should be "make CHAPMS=1". This is what I did and it compiled with
not error but I haven't needed the MSCHAP code for an ISP so it is
untested.
: Sorry for my terrible english.
I think it is rather good.
--
Clifford Kite <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Not a guru. (tm)
/* 97.3% of all statistics are made up. */
------------------------------
From: Barry Margolin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.security,comp.security.unix,redhat.general,redhat.networking.general,aus.computers.linux
Subject: Re: Security hole with WU-FTPD
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 01:29:40 GMT
In article <0yRn2.85285$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Eugene <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>what else did you expect???
>where in the world did you see *root access to ftp* ?????
>by default root ftp logins are *disabled*
His complaint is that normal login treats a passwd entry with no password
as meaning the user can't login, but WU-FTPD treats it as an account that
can login without a password. That's a dangerous inconsistency, don't you
think?
>you crippled the security
What are you talking about? Someone apparently broke into their system and
somehow added that passwd entry. How do you translate that to "you
crippled the security"?
--
Barry Margolin, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
GTE Internetworking, Powered by BBN, Burlington, MA
*** DON'T SEND TECHNICAL QUESTIONS DIRECTLY TO ME, post them to newsgroups.
Don't bother cc'ing followups to me.
------------------------------
From: David Farber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: HELP: virtual hosting, mail, pop3
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 11:37:27 -0700
i am running RedHat 5.1 on a Pentium machine. i want to use the machine
to do virtual hosting. i am primarily concerned with virtual web
hosting, but i also need to provied email acounts for the domains i
host. i need to know:
1) how to set up accounts on each of the virtual domains.
2) how to allow ftp access to these accounts
3) how to configure sendmail to route mail to these accounts
4) how to set up a pop3 server to access these accounts.
i have been through the HOWTO archive, several books and several FAQs
and could not find this information. any help or pointers to info would
be greatly appreciated.
david
--
david farber//change ronemun to numenor in my email address to reply
------------------------------
From: "Brian E. Parker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: PPP Server Questions
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 10:16:00 -0600
Hello,
We have a Redhat box...
Red Hat Linux release 5.2 (Apollo)
Kernel 2.0.36 on an i586
...at work and it has 3 modems in it. We are wanting to make it a PPP
server so that we can dial into it and connect to our network. We got the
'connect to our network part' part figured out. We now need to get it to
act as a PPP server.
>From what I have read, there is very little difference between having a
Linux box be a PPP client or being a server. You just set up PPP and change
something in a script somewhere (the vagueness begins...).
So, what are the basic steps for us getting our box set up to be our
dial-in? If there is a good FAQ on this, please point me to it.
Is XISP something we want to use for this? Is there something better? Am I
in the right ballpark? We aren't interested in running any kind of
accounting on the dial-in users, if that makes a difference, but we would
still like to have some sort of decent log files on the usage.
Basically, we are relatively new to this, so any help would be greatly
appreciated. If you would, please CC: any replies to the group to my e-mail
at: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
TIA,
-BEP
------------------------------
From: Bill Dossett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: samba vs. nfs
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 17:36:51 +0000
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi,
I'm using FTP software NFS client for Windoze 95 and Linux for NFS
server.
I'm running a music juke box with all the music stored on the
Linux server's 18 Gig disk... I've got three Win95 systems that
play music from the server's disk. I use a fast ethernet switch with
3c905 cards...I get an occasional glitch and doing the maths, I should
be well safe... Any ideas if I would get better performance using
samba server with the windoze clients...
thanks
Bill
------------------------------
From: "Charles Stack" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: When I'm online, my hard drive makes noise...
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 13:34:58 -0500
How much memory do you have? Sounds like you are doing a lot of swapping.
------------------------------
From: "Gster" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Online with Linux
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 01:38:13 -0600
Yes the kernel does recognize the ports..
Guy
Stef wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>: I really can't figure out why I can't get the modem to work. When I run
>: minicom it says there is no such file or dir /dev/modem, but the file is
>: there.
>
>Yes, it will say so, if there is nothing connected to it.
>Does the kernel recognize your serial ports during startup?
>
>Stef
>--
>WebMaster D-WERK
>UNIX and Windows NT administration, SOS-ETH
>ETH Zurich
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hoes.li
------------------------------
From: "David Kerr" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Austin RR: not working consistently
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 12:48:11 -0600
I recently installed Redhat Linux 5.2 and, using rrdhcpcd and rrlogind,
successfully connected to the RoadRunner service in austin. Unfortunately I
can't get it to work consistently.
The symptom of the problem is that sometimes (50% to 70% of the time) during
boot the eth0 adapter is detected and dhcp successfully obtains the IP
address info, etc. However whatever follows next in the boot sequence does
not complete successfully. Instead of immediately going on and running
portmapper, the boot messages pause for 30 to 60 seconds, then the line
"localhost.localdomain" is displayed, then we continue with portmapper, etc.
Normally nothing is displayed between dhcp completing and portmapper
running. When boot completes and the login prompt is displayed, instead of
showing the hostname as obtained from DNS (includes the IP address obtained,
like "xx40.107") it shows the hostname that I configured for my 2nd NIC.
After boot, whenever I do anything that attempts network stuff, even just
executing "route" or "netstat -r" there is a pause for 30-60 seconds before
the system responds. All attempts to do anything accross eth0 fail,
including pings (except pings to myself).
My attempts to debug/fix this include changing ethernet cards (I've tried
NE2000 ISA, NE2000 PCI, 3Com 3C590, 3Com 3C905). Disabling the 2nd NIC, not
starting the eth0 device until after boot completes (using "ifconfig eth0
on" followed by running rrdhcpcd. All attempts result in the same symptom.
Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. Dhcp always appears to
successfully obtain an IP address (according to ifconfig), yet for some
reason sometimes basic network stuff like ping to the gateway (24.93.40.1)
fails.
I'm suspecting that this has something to do with DNS, but I can't track it
down. resolv.conf always appears to be correct (austin.rr.com, 24.93.35.65,
etc).
Anyone have any ideas?
Thanks
David Kerr
------------------------------
From: "Ajay Garg (From Calvert)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: help
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 11:28:35 -0500
Hi folks,
I want to find the interface between IP and lower levels in linux
version 2.0.34 and also I want to trace input processing by the IP. I am
looking for the good starting point.
thanks
Ajay
------------------------------
From: "Richard S. Lumpkin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.portable,comp.os.linux.powerpc,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: This is Linux, not Windows, so why not superior flexibility AND
idiot-friendly?
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 15:58:20 +0000
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Richard S. Lumpkin wrote:
>
> MalkContent wrote:
> >
>
> Yada, yada, yada.
>
> Why don't you yap about this on the advocacy newsgroups and level the
> technical discussions groups out of it. We're trying to help and learn
> about Linux, whining about how hard you find it has no place here.
level, yikes --> leave
========================================================================
Richard S. Lumpkin, Ph.D. Associate Professor
Department of Chemistry 256-890-6365
University of Alabama in Huntsville fax 256-890-6349
Huntsville, AL 35899 http://chromophore.uah.edu
========================================================================
Forward Fraudulent Spam to the US Federal Trade Commission: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Daniel Goh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Network: Can't Ping
Date: 15 Jan 1999 16:59:59 GMT
I've found the problem. It is that the routing on the Win 95 system was not
set properly.
Daniel Goh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in article
<77kvie$oak$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> Hi,
>
> I have just set up a network between a Linux Box and a Win 95 System.
Both
> systems work perfectly in Win 95 so there is no problem with the hardware
> but in Linux for one of the PCs, I am unable to ping the other Win 95
system
> and the Win 95 system is unable to ping the Linux Box aswell, but eth0
> interface is working (able to ping myself). I was wondering if there is
any
> other setting needed or special settings to ping different operating
> systems.
>
> Thank you.
>
> Regards,
> Daniel
>
> P.S. Please reply to email.
>
>
>
------------------------------
From: James Carlson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.dcom.modems,comp.protocols.ppp
Subject: Re: FCS errors: too many?
Date: 16 Jan 1999 14:18:40 -0500
"Henry C. Barta" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I reverted to an older US Robotics V.34+ modem and find that
> throughput is as good as can be expected (3400 cps on compressed
> data.) There are still "frame with bad fcs" errors and 'ifconfig'
> still reports dropped packets though.
If it runs better at lower speeds, the two likely culprits are flow
control and interrupt settings.
> So..... Have I found the problem with 'bad FCS' sequences? I'm
> assuming that this results from dropped characters. Are *any*
> dropped packets or "frame with bad fcs" errors normal?
"bad FCS" results when the CRC of the received packet doesn't match a
constant F0B8. It can happen because of lost, added, or otherwise
corrupted characters in the packet.
If you're running V.42 or MNP-5 (and all modern modems do these by
default), and you're using proper flow control, then there should
simply never be any "bad FCS" errors at all. (Race conditions in
poorly implemented PPP-speaking peers may cause 1 or 2 errors during
the initial handshake, but none should occur beyond that.)
Dropped packets can be normal, depending on the situation. Bad FCSes,
though, aren't.
> Linux kernel 2.0.36 SMP
> buffered UARTS
> USR Sportster external modem (works)
> Supra Express V.90 external (used to work...)
> pppd 2.3.5
There's probably a low-level communications problem here. As is
frequently mentioned here, one of the common causes of bizarre modem
behavior on PCs is those danged IRQ settings.
--
James Carlson, Consulting S/W Engineer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
IronBridge Networks / 55 Hayden Avenue 71.246W Vox: +1 781 372 8132
Lexington MA 02421-7996 / USA 42.423N Fax: +1 781 372 8090
"PPP Design and Debugging" --- http://people.ne.mediaone.net/carlson/ppp
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: IPX problem
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 17:47:51 GMT
[posted and mailed]
This just means that some other device on your network (perhaps file server
or little-box-type print server] is using both 802.2 and 802.3
frames with the same net number.
This is something print servers commonly do. You can either run around
to every machine and make sure it uses just one frame type, or you can ignore
them, or comment the messages out of the IPX module and recompile.
"Matthew Srebinski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have a RH 5.1 box that I recently switched from running on our in office
> LAN to the university LAN, now it started giving me error messages on the
> system console saying "IPX network name conflict 160, eth0 802.2 eth0
> 802.3" I assume this is because somehow this box got setup to run both
> 802.2 and 802.3 protocols on the same interface and the IPX name assigned to
> the system is conflicting with each other. I configured it only to run one,
> and I did a ipx_configure --auto_interface=off" to keep the system from
> restarting the other, however when I reboot it defaults back to both being
> on. I remember editing a config file a couple of months back that was
> specific to IPX but I cannot find it again and can't find refrences to it in
============= Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ============
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
