On 11 Feb 2001, Harry Putnam wrote:
>
[snip]
>
> Now I'm seeing some more confusing phenomena. My firewall is
> apparently blocking something involved in this transmission. Or at
> least I see packets being blocked going out eth0. (My internet
> connection). It seems this conversation between two machines on the
> local lan should take place soley on eth1. And in fact I don't think
> that `smbclient' command would return any information if it was being
> sent over eth0.
>
> But every time I send the smbclient -L -N chub I get a packet blocked
> at the firewall on eth0, is that normal? Syslog item:
>
Yes, it is normal, unless you edit /etc/smb.conf, and specify the
network to use. smbclient is asking the machine it is trying to talk to
to identify itself, so it know where to send its request. It is kind of
like doing a DNS query.
>
> Something has changed but I can't tell what. I was able to get feed
> back from the smbclient command but cannot now.
>
> # smbclient -L -N chub
> SSL: Error error setting CA cert locations: error:00000000::lib(0)
>:func(0) :reason(0)
> trying default locations.
> added interface ip=206.117.4.49 bcast=206.117.4.255 nmask=255.255.255.0
> added interface ip=192.168.xxx bcast=192.168.1.255 nmask=255.255.255.0
> Packet send failed to 206.117.4.255(137) ERRNO=Operation not permitted
> Connection to -N failed
> [206:root]>~
> #
>
This is because you change the option order. The -L must be follower by
the machine name. Because you put the -N option after the -L option,
smbclient is looking for a machine named -N. Dumb, I know. I have
never tried it, but I am guessing you actualy could have a Windows
machine named -N...
Mikkel
--
Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons,
for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.
_______________________________________________
Redhat-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
