Linux-Networking Digest #611, Volume #10 Wed, 24 Mar 99 01:13:40 EST
Contents:
Re: netscape error - hosts unreachable (John McKee)
Re: Bought modem to work in LINUX! ("Bob D")
Re: DNS+ISP=broken network (kyhm)
UPS shutdowns (Wayne Mews)
Re: PPP - Geesh (paulr)
Re: Ad filter? ("Krasselt")
Re: TCP/IP and IPX (Ron Flory)
NE2000 under DosLinux (Tarsi)
Re: Netscape ftp, port numbers and ipfwadm ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Need unusual IP address translation (Chris Ott)
Re: Encrypted Passwords on a Linux Samba box?! (Wayne Mews)
Network address translation ("Super Net News")
Re: Machine name themes - what do you use? (Jerry Cornelius)
Re: Netscape and ftp ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Assistance securing a DNS server (Ed Robbins)
Linux -> Cisco VPN ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: SIOCADDRT: Invalid argument ("M. Brian Akins")
Re: PPP makes me crazy, please anyone give a good idea (Bill Unruh)
Re: Routing from Linux through an NT server (Cody Sherr)
Re: Netscape and ftp ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: FTP from Windows machines to Linux ("Paul Bary")
Re: WYSE terminal connection to linux box (Cody Sherr)
Re: 2.2.3 PCMCIA Ethernet DHCP Woes (David Hinds)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John McKee)
Subject: Re: netscape error - hosts unreachable
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1999 01:04:06 GMT
Can you ping anything on the internet? If not, perhaps your routing is not setup
correctly. That
was my case. My initial setup had the routing setup to look at my internal (eth0)
network.
I get around that by "route del default" prior to opening my internet connection.
HTH,
On Tue, 23 Mar 1999 23:22:15 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>I have successfully connected to my internet server using xisp; however, when
>I try to browse the web using Netscape, I get the following message:
>
>
>"
>Warning : the following hosts are unknown:
>
> home.netscape.com
> home6.netscape.com
> internic.net
>
>This means that some or all hosts will be unreachable.
>
>Perhaps there is a problem with your names server? If your site must use a
>non-root name server, you will need to set the $SOCKS_NS environment variable
>to point at the appropriate name server. It may (or may not) be necessary to
>set this variable, or the SOCKS host preference, to the IP address of the
>host in question rather than its name.
>
>Consult your system administrator."
>
>My problem is that I am my own system administrator and do not know how to
>handle this :(
>I tried creating the SOCKS variable, but that was of no use...
>
>Thanks in advance, Mendeli
>
>-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
>http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
John McKee
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Bob D" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Bought modem to work in LINUX!
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1999 04:39:50 GMT
I also bought this modem to upgrade from a 28.8 on my Lan gateway machine.
However, I can't get the ppp script to work. It dies waiting for ATZ to
return an 'OK'. I can manually dial out using minicom but the modem response
to any AT commands come back at the rate of 1 character every 6 seconds!
Unfortunately there is no help for the Linux user on the 3Com website or
knowledge base. Anyone using this modem successfully with a ppp dial-up
script please help!
Bob D
Robert Lynch wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>Hi y'all-
>
>I've been reading all the msgs. to the effect "How do I know if I'm
>getting a Winmodem?" with some interest, because I wanted to buy a 56K
>v. 90 modem.
>
>I decided after a lot of fruitless searching to try this: I contacted a
>supplier who advertised in Linux Journal, April '99, p. 64, called "ASA
>Computers".
>
>http://www.asacomputers.com/
>
>They had marked one modem in their list as a Winmodem: "COMM56IUSRO
>...WINMODEM!!!! TO BE USED WITH WINDOWS ONLY!!". So it seemed their
>advertisement in LJ plus this note implied they know about Linux. (Does
>that follow? :)
>
>I ordered a USR/3Com 56K data/fax/voice V.90 internal modem, came to
>about US$80 total with S/H by UPS plus California sales tax. In the
>on-line order form and by separate e-mail I emphasized that I wanted a
>modem that works with Linux, otherwise forget it. They e-mailed back,
>"Don't worry, it will work in Linux".
>
>It came today. It's ISA and PNP, but pnptools can handle the latter
>(and my last, 28.8K modem was PNP anyhow). They were right, it works in
>Linux, I get about 50K+ connects.
>
>They have cheaper modems than this advertised, also, but I can't speak
>for these.
>
>I have no connection with this outfit. Seems to me that if they started
>marking their modems as useable in Linux, they might get a lot of
>business from us sort of folks.
>
>Thought I'd share my modem adventure, in case it helps anyone else.
>
>Bob L.
>--
>Robert Lynch-Berkeley CA [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>http://www.best.com/~rmlynch/
>
------------------------------
From: kyhm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: DNS+ISP=broken network
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1999 17:12:56 -0800
Alan Mead wrote:
(snip)
> I have 2 Win95 and 1 Linux machines on a 10 Mbps peer-based network at
> home. I added the Linux box as a Samba server and all was cool after
> assigning all boxes bogus IP's. I can dial the ISP from either Win95
> machine and it gets a new IP dynamically and everything is still cool
> (I guess the Windows dial-up and nic adapters can live with having
> different IP's).
I have a similar network at home (WinNT and Win95 clients, Linux
servers). My Linux server is an authoritative DNS for my network, and
configured as a forward-only nameserver for anything else, and it works
perfectly.
Also, you should absolutely not run DNS while connected to your ISP
unless it is properly setup as forward-only! Otherwise your DNS will be
sending information about your (imaginary) network on 192.168.x.y. ISPs
get very upset about this for some reason... ;-)
> So my question is, how do I configure these machines so that the Linux
> box serves the DNS for my little net and the ISP's DNS is consulted
> for the rest of the world?
I can't remember or explain all the steps I took, but I can mail or
post the pertinent parts of my config files. Simple question first: can
your Linux box get out to the Net? If you want to setup forward-only
DNS your DNS must be able to
> And quickly, I'm not going the IP-Masq route of putting the Linux box
> on the net because I need to ftp frequently from the Windows boxes and
> I understand that IP-Masq breaks certain programs like ftp that need
> to "call-back"?
To use FTP over masquerade you need to compile and install specific
modules on the Linux firewall. It really is just 'insmod ip_masq_ftp'
to do it once it's setup. Feel free to email me, since I've fought this
thing and won.
It's also worth mentioning that my experience has been that Linux PPP
is faster and more stable than Windows Dial-up Networking. However
certain sites refuse to talk to my masquerading server, like hotmail and
iomega.com...
--
Morgan Hughes
C programmer and highly caffeinated mammal
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1999 22:28:30 -0600
From: Wayne Mews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: UPS shutdowns
I wish to use my current Samba server as simply a file server
and run several winNT work station in peer to peer workgroup
The samba server and one Winnt workstation will be on the same SUPU
can I tell the samba server (it is currently a CDROM tower server) to
shutdown the WinNT workstation and then shut itself down? If so how.
I am using Samba 1.9.18p5 form the Turbolinux 2.0 package
Thanks in advance
Wayne
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I luv linux
------------------------------
From: paulr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: PPP - Geesh
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1999 19:32:00 -0600
Manish Laad wrote:
>
> I have the exact same problem. I used Kppp to configure PPP in RedHat Linux 5.2.
> This is the only thing that is keeping me from making my computer Windoze free!
> Any help would be greatly appreciated. Please e-mail replies.
>
> Manish
>
> SteveT wrote:
>
> > Hello:
> >
> > I have just installed Red-Hat Linux 5.1 and finaly got just about everything
> > to work properly. Except, PPP.
> >
> > I have configured my PPP connection using the Xwindows program "network
> > configurator." When I try to connect to my ISP (Bell Atlantic) it
> > initializes the modem, dials, then supposedly connects (via PAP).
> >
> > While it seems to be connected I am unable to PING any servers, getting the
> > message "Network is Unreachable" Then, after about 2-3 minutes I am
> > disconencted alltogether. In the Network configurator it says the the
> > connection is still active
I tripped up on this recently. I updated Redhat from 5.1 to 5.2.
Here's something to try:
As root, cd /etc....
Edit /etc/resolve.conf. Simple edit -- erase EVERYTHING.
You want to be left with a 0 byte file size. Now, and this
is the tricky part:
Change permissions on /etc/resolv.conf to
-rw-rw-rw- 1 root root 127 Mar 23 18:47
/etc/resolv.conf
^^^^^^^^^^^
EzPPP (and Kppp) create "temporary" entries in /etc/resolv.conf to
make networking go! If you are logged in successfully, switch to a
terminal window and type "more /etc/resolv.conf" and you'll see this:
================<begin as=Im=typing=this>===========
# /etc/resolv.conf
search ameritech.net #EzPPP Temp Entry
nameserver 206.141.192.243 #EzPPP Temp Entry
nameserver 206.141.251.2 #EzPPP Temp Entry
===================<end as=Im=typing=this>=================
Bet that'll do it!
Paul
--
*******************************************
Paul Reich Motorola, Inc.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Staff Engineer
#include <Motorola/std_disclaimer.h>
"A CPU Cycle is a Terrible Thing to waste."
*******************************************
------------------------------
From: "Krasselt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]**nospam**>
Subject: Re: Ad filter?
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1999 15:31:29 +0100
You can use Internet Junkbuster for this purpose. Running the Junkbuster on
your server will filter almost all ads from web pages. It does also support
forwarding data to a proxy server (like squid).
URL: http://www.waldherr.org/junkbuster/
Karl
Colin Guillas schrieb in Nachricht <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>Hi! I have seen products for NT Servers which can be configured to block
out ad
>banners from known web sites of banners, such as doubleclick.net on
altavista,
>and replace them with another banner of your choice that is loaded faster
off of
>the server. This is used to skim pennies in a corporate environment where
the
>internet fees are based on the bandwidth used, and for modem users it is
>beneficial because it skims a few seconds off of the loading time.
>
>Is it possible to put something on my linux server that will do the same?
It is
>a gateway, through IP Masquerading, for the other machines on the network.
>
>Thanks a lot! Email replies if you can, there's an awful lot to wade
through in
>this group...
>--
>+----------------------------------------------------+
>| Colin Guillas Ringmaster For Commodore Ring |
>| http://welcome.to/cbmring [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
>+----| ICQ#: 19683759 |-----| Ham Radio: VA3CSG |----+
------------------------------
From: Ron Flory <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: TCP/IP and IPX
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1999 20:41:41 -0600
MaYToUCh wrote:
>
> How can I set my slackware to use TCP/IP for internet and IPX for LAN
I know nothing about Slackware, but 'ncpfs' works fine under 2.2.2-ac7
kernel.
ron
------------------------------
From: Tarsi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: NE2000 under DosLinux
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1999 20:35:48 -0600
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Can someone please help me fill out the software requirements for
installing a Generic NE2000 Eth card under DosLinux 2.2.1? Thank you!
Tarsi
210
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Netscape ftp, port numbers and ipfwadm
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1999 01:28:31 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
david koski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> When attempting to ftp with Netscape 4.04 (RH 5.1 server and ppp
> connection to ISP) I cannot get through my firewall. I noticed that the
> port numbers reported on the status line of Netscape are 1025..65535
> (high). I can however ftp at the prompt. The same thing is true on the
> Windoze and OS/2 clients Netscape. Ftp programs work on the clients
> too, but not Netscape's ftp. What gives?
>
Ok, so the problem seems to be the reverse of the common "can't get through
with ftp" problem. I can get through with "normal" non-pasive ftp but not
PASV mode which seems to be what Netscape defaults to. If Netscape
*defaults* to PASV mode that seems to imply that there is a way to switch it
to "normal" non-pasive mode. Any clues how to do it?
============= Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ============
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chris Ott)
Subject: Need unusual IP address translation
Date: 23 Mar 1999 20:39:57 -0500
Here's an interesting problem.
My company does a lot of remote support. What we're doing now is
using PC Anywhere or a terminal emulator (depending on the remote
OS) to connect to a computer at our clients' sites. There are
several problems with this approach, however. One is that it only
allows us to connect to the machine with the modem. It would be
nice if we could connect to any machine on their network. Another
problem is that only one person from here can get to that machine
at a time. People are always getting busy signals when they're
trying to do work for clients. Both of these problems could be
eliminated if we and our clients were connected via TCP/IP,
i.e. a Linux box at each end, running PPP.
Here's the problem: All of our clients are using the 192.168.1.x
network. (And, of course, we are, too). So - what I'd like to be
able to do is have each of our clients' networks look like a
different address, as far as our network is concerned. (I'd love
to be able to tell them to change their addresses, but you know
how those network administrators can be. :-)
For example, let's say I decide to assign IP 192.168.2.x to a
client and if I telnet to 192.168.2.57, I'd like that to get
translated to 192.168.*1*.57 at the remote end. It's easy to set
up the routing on the communications server to get the IP
packets to the remote Linux box, but once they get there, the
IP header will need to be rewritten, or something, so the packets
get to the correct machine. At the same time, the IP packets
returned to our network from 192.168.1.57 will need to be
modified, in transit. Of course, our network will need to appear
to have a different adress from the client's side, as well.
Now, I'm sure this is possible, since IP Masquerading does
something similar and it works quite well. However, I looked
into the "ipfwadm" documentation and it doesn't appear to be
quite powerful enough to do what I need.
Does anyone know a way to do this? Is there a better way to
accomplish the same thing?
It would be nice if we could do this over the Internet, too,
using VPN software, but I'm sure that's a completely different
ball of wax.
Thanks,
Chris
--
Chris Ott Are you children clinging tenaciously to my buttocks?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - Powdered Toast Man
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1999 22:45:58 -0600
From: Wayne Mews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Encrypted Passwords on a Linux Samba box?!
try the site www.troubleshooter.com there are several good tutorial setups for
SAMBA
it helped me get my Winnt boxes working on SAMBA 1.9.18p5 (Turbolinux 2.0)
sincerely
Wayne
Ronald Cole wrote:
> Jason McKnight <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > This is what the documentation with SAMBA says to do
> >
> > cat /etc/passwd | mksmbpasswd.sh > /etc/smbpasswd
> >
> > The docs actually tell you to put it somewhere else, but the default smb.conf
> > is looking there.
> >
> > However, i can't get my SAMBA to work with passwords still.
>
> Do your Windows user names match your Linux user names? Or do you
> have spaces in your Windows user name? You might want to rtfm about
> "username.map".
>
> --
> Forte International, P.O. Box 1412, Ridgecrest, CA 93556-1412
> Ronald Cole <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Phone: (760) 499-9142
> President, CEO Fax: (760) 499-9152
> My PGP fingerprint: 15 6E C7 91 5F AF 17 C4 24 93 CB 6B EB 38 B5 E5
------------------------------
From: "Super Net News" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Network address translation
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1999 23:16:18 +0800
Can I do NAT with ipfwadm? Can anyone help?
Martin
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jerry Cornelius)
Crossposted-To:
vmsnet.networks.misc,microsoft.public.windowsnt.domain,comp.unix.solaris,comp.os.os2.networking.server,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.admin.networking,comp.infosystems.www.servers.unix,comp.protocols.tcp-ip.domains
Subject: Re: Machine name themes - what do you use?
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 1999 16:41:49 GMT
What? No SweetPea? That'd have to be a Linux box...
On Fri, 19 Mar 1999 17:49:59 -0500, "Bill Hanna"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Popeye characters! popeye, olive, brutus, wimpy (the win98 system, of
>course), etc.
Microsoft's dogma: If it's broke don't fix it until we get swamped by the press.
Linux Community dogma: If it's Microsoft, it's broke. Don't fix it.
Web Developer dogma: mmmm, Fosters...
Berry Sizemore
Web Developer
Web-X LLC
http://www.web-x.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
253-383-8767 xt. 231
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Netscape and ftp
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1999 01:32:49 GMT
No proxy here. Direct connect with packet filtering with ipfwadm.
In article <7d5loi$l9r$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> If you are using a proxy server to connect to the internet , try
> changing the ftp port in netscape to that used by the HTTP protocol
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>
> david koski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I cannot ftp with Netscape but I *can* with other ftp programs including
> > the standard ftp with Linux. I have confirmed that ftp works in
> > "normal" non-passive mode through my packet filtering filewall
> > (ipfwadm). I am running RH5.1 for a file/print server and gateway to
> > Internet through a dialup PPP connection to my local ISP. Clients
> > (Windoze and OS/2) work the same--i.e. Netscape=no go, other ftp in
> > "normal" mode=yes.
> >
> > Ok, so the problem seems to be the reverse of the common "can't get
> > through with ftp" problem. I can get through with "normal" non-pasive
> > ftp but not PASV mode which seems to be what Netscape defaults to. If
> > Netscape *defaults* to PASV mode that seems to imply that there is a way
> > to switch it to "normal" non-pasive mode. Any clues how to do it?
> >
> > regards,
> > david
> >
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
>
> Blessing K. Sagonda
> Networks
> Ok Zimbabwe
>
> -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
> http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
>
============= Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ============
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
From: Ed Robbins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Assistance securing a DNS server
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1999 11:20:15 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Depending on what your looking for, I've had a lot of experience in this exact
setup. Email me directly and I'll help you with whatever I can.
Ed
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I'm building a couple of Red Hat v5.2 servers to be DNS servers and am looking
> for some guidance in "locking them down". Are there any "How To's" out there?
>
> Thanks, Clif
>
> -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
> http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Linux -> Cisco VPN
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1999 02:42:56 GMT
My company is currently pursuing a VPN solution using Cisco's VPN software on
top of some 2600 class routers and a Cisco PIX (self-contained packet
filter/firewall) box.
I'm reading that Cisco supports IPsec and so do the ssh people... I'm doing
some reading up on IPsec, but in the meantime I'm getting the feeling that it
may be possible to do the following:
1) ssh *into* the cisco router
2) create a VPN by tunneling through the ssh connection
Is this only wishful thinking?
Anyone else have any Linux -> non-Linux VPN experiences?
Thanks for any info
============= Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ============
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1999 08:11:10 -0500
From: "M. Brian Akins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: SIOCADDRT: Invalid argument
I get that on both of my NIC's but everything works fine. I think in
RedHat some stuff from a config file is read that shouldn't be or
something. I tried to trace it down, but finally figured that it wasn't
worth it bcs Everything is running great.
Butr if anyone knows what this is I'd be glad to know.
Max wrote:
> Greetings All!
>
> I get the following message during startup:
> SIOCADDRT: Invalid argument
>
> what's it mean?
>
> Thanks in advance
>
> Max Pyziur
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bill Unruh)
Subject: Re: PPP makes me crazy, please anyone give a good idea
Date: 24 Mar 1999 02:20:20 GMT
In <7d8oc1$9ov$[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "Jos van Santen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>with IFUP and IFDOWN. They all give the same result, I get connected to my
>ISP and I get an IP address assigned, but it's impossible to reach anything
>outside my computer. I can ping the ppp0 address, but not the gateway. I do
route -n befor you run ppp should not have a default entry.
ie no line starting with 0.0.0.0
pppd should be run with the defaultroute option
route -n after the connection should have a default route
0.0.0.0 a.b.c.d ....... ppp0
^^^^^^^ the address of your ISP.
------------------------------
From: Cody Sherr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Routing from Linux through an NT server
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1999 05:57:26 GMT
I heard that NT had problems with RAS and class A networks. That might be a
flagrant rumor, but you could try using the class C (192.168.x.x) or one of the
Bs,
just my .02
cody
Peter Greenwood wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Adam C. Emerson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >after doing:
> >route add -net default gw 10.0.0.1
> >all my packets are dropped.
>
> Here are a few suggestions that may get you going (apologies if you've
> already tried all these):
>
> First, are you *sure* that's the right IP address for the router?
>
> Second, what about name services? You may need to tell your resolver
> (via /etc/resolv.conf) or BIND if you're running it (/etc/named.boot
> or /etc/named.conf) about your ISP's nameservers. This may not apply
> to the Win95 machines as the NT box may be handling this for them
> somehow (I think NT can provide a WINS name service, getting the
> information from DNS).
>
> You could try using ping and traceroute to see how far your packets are
> getting before they get lost.
>
> Peter
>
> --
> Peter Greenwood [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Email advertisements received at this site are subject to a handling charge
> of TWENTY-FIVE POUNDS STERLING. By sending such material you agree to be
> bound by this condition.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Netscape and ftp
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1999 01:41:05 GMT
No proxy here. Connection to ISP is via PPP using ipfwadm filtering.
In article <7d5loi$l9r$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> If you are using a proxy server to connect to the internet , try
> changing the ftp port in netscape to that used by the HTTP protocol
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>
> david koski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I cannot ftp with Netscape but I *can* with other ftp programs including
> > the standard ftp with Linux. I have confirmed that ftp works in
> > "normal" non-passive mode through my packet filtering filewall
> > (ipfwadm). I am running RH5.1 for a file/print server and gateway to
> > Internet through a dialup PPP connection to my local ISP. Clients
> > (Windoze and OS/2) work the same--i.e. Netscape=no go, other ftp in
> > "normal" mode=yes.
> >
> > Ok, so the problem seems to be the reverse of the common "can't get
> > through with ftp" problem. I can get through with "normal" non-pasive
> > ftp but not PASV mode which seems to be what Netscape defaults to. If
> > Netscape *defaults* to PASV mode that seems to imply that there is a way
> > to switch it to "normal" non-pasive mode. Any clues how to do it?
> >
> > regards,
> > david
> >
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
>
> Blessing K. Sagonda
> Networks
> Ok Zimbabwe
>
> -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
> http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
>
============= Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ============
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
From: "Paul Bary" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: FTP from Windows machines to Linux
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1999 22:49:10 -0700
hmmm...I'll give it a whirl but I'm doubtful as the situaton occurs whether
I ftp to the name or address...similarly
if I ping the name, it lists the address...this being said, I'll certainly
try and let you know...it's late and I've got to get some zzz's
Many Thanks,
Paul
L J Bayuk wrote in message ...
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>Strange scenario...I've got two linux (RH 5.2) boxes on a small home
>>network. I can ftp between them with
>>no problem...however if I attempt to ftp to either of them from either an
NT
>>box or a Win98 workstation,
>>the process appears to be hung, but if I let it sit for 3-5 minutes, the
>>connection is finally made and I can
>>log in.
>> This occurrs whether ftp using name or ip so I doubt resolution is the
>>problem...any thoughts?
>
>Possibly reverse resolution is the problem. On Linux, do you
>have DNS servers in /etc/resolv.conf? Try putting the Win98
>PC's IP address and name into the Linux server's /etc/hosts file,
>and make /etc/host.conf say "order hosts,bind" instead of bind (DNS)
>first. If this fixes it, the problem was the Linux server trying
>to use a (probably unreachable) DNS server to reverse-resolve the
>Win98's IP address.
------------------------------
From: Cody Sherr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: WYSE terminal connection to linux box
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1999 05:54:36 GMT
I just set up a wyse 50 terminal, so I might be able to shed some light onto the
subject.
First, make sure that hardware is working. You've got a null modem cable, so the
physical connection is probably working. Make sure the terminal is set to 9600 no
parity 1 bit, hardware flow control, and DTR receive.
Depending on your distribution, you could also need to tell init to enable getty
on that tty. You need to know which serial port it was. It's probably /dev/ttyS0,
aka COM1. If you're not sure, you could take the maniac approach, and echo all the
device file names to themselves using this little shell script:
for i in /dev/tty*; do echo $i >> $i;done
Now, find the commented entry for a getty on that device file in /etc/inittab and
uncomment it. If it's not there, there should be something close to it. Otherwise,
read the inittab man page. Hopefully, that'll have a login prompt on your
terminal.
hope that helps,
cody
"Chi K. Chan" wrote:
> rastus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> : I salvaged a WYSE dumb terminal from our local dump today :)
>
> : I have a null cable (25pin and 9 pin connectors @ both ends), and have
> : connected the 25pin to the terminal, and the 9 pin to a comm port. (tty1) of
> : the linux box.
>
> : I tried following the how-to serial doc., but i still get no login
> : prompt on the terminal...
>
> : Am I being naive in connecting different connectors with the null cable (ie.
> : 9 pin --> 25 pin) or should this work just fine ?
>
> : Regards,
> : Mike / Rastus
> : [EMAIL PROTECTED] send me no junk (mail) and I'll send you no e-mail
> : dictionaries :)
>
> Could there be a setting on the terminal to set up as a DCE or DTE
> device ? Forgot which requires NULL modem cable, the other doesn't.
>
> Good Luck,
> Chi
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David Hinds)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.portable
Subject: Re: 2.2.3 PCMCIA Ethernet DHCP Woes
Date: 24 Mar 1999 05:41:32 GMT
Aaron Mulder ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: However, it seems that DHCP paralyzes the card manager. If my eth0
: device is set to use DHCP in the /etc/pcmcia/network.opts script, then
: everything looks OK at boot. However, it never creates eth1. /var/run/stab
: claims that the second PCMCIA slot is empty, even though cardctl reports
: (some) information for the card there. But all networking via eth0 works
: correctly.
As a quick fix, edit /etc/pcmcia/network and change:
/sbin/dhcpcd -c $L $DEVICE
to:
/sbin/dhcpcd -c $L $DEVICE >/dev/null 2>&1
-- Dave Hinds
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
