[CentOS] PCI ethernet card for CentOS
I need to get a second ethernet card for my HP Proliant CentOS server, to attach a LinkSys WRT54GL router to. I see that there are many Realtek RTL8169S gigabit cards going for a song on eBay. Is anyone using one of these under CentOS? Do they work OK? (I used to have a couple of Realtek cards - not gigabit - and they worked fine.) Or does anyone have a strong recommendation for other cards? Any advice or suggestions gratefully received. -- Timothy Murphy e-mail: gayleard /at/ eircom.net tel: +353-86-2336090, +353-1-2842366 s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] PCI ethernet card for CentOS
On 26/02/11 15:38, Timothy Murphy wrote: I need to get a second ethernet card for my HP Proliant CentOS server, to attach a LinkSys WRT54GL router to. I see that there are many Realtek RTL8169S gigabit cards going for a song on eBay. Is anyone using one of these under CentOS? Do they work OK? (I used to have a couple of Realtek cards - not gigabit - and they worked fine.) Or does anyone have a strong recommendation for other cards? Any advice or suggestions gratefully received. I really recommend you something else than these Realcrap cards. They might work fine in many settings, but you never really know. If you google around, you'll find plenty of stories where these cards are really unpredictable, and my own experiences are also not good. You can probably find pretty decent Intel EtherExpress PRO/100 cards, which really has an incomparable quality. As you're talking about the WRT54GL, you don't need to think about 1Gbit cards. Which makes the PRO/100 cards optimal. Just my 2 cents. kind regards, David Sommerseth ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] PCI ethernet card for CentOS
I see that there are many Realtek RTL8169S gigabit cards going for a song on eBay. I've always liked and used Realtek cards, and I use the RTL8169S in my servers. However, the RTL8169S has one problem: overheating. If you buy any, make sure they include a heatsink. Those without a heatsink are prone to locking up if the temperatures inside your case get too high. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] PCI ethernet card for CentOS
David Sommerseth wrote: You can probably find pretty decent Intel EtherExpress PRO/100 cards, which really has an incomparable quality. As you're talking about the WRT54GL, you don't need to think about 1Gbit cards. Which makes the PRO/100 cards optimal. Thanks very much. I wasn't sure if there was any point in going for a gigabit card. I've been very impressed with the Intel ethernet adaptors in my laptops, though I was a bit surprised I had to hunt around for both Windows and Fedora drivers for my current Thinkpad T60, with an Intel 82573L Gigabit Ethernet Controller, although once I found them it has worked perfectly. -- Timothy Murphy e-mail: gayleard /at/ eircom.net tel: +353-86-2336090, +353-1-2842366 s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] PCI ethernet card for CentOS
compdoc wrote: I've always liked and used Realtek cards, and I use the RTL8169S in my servers. However, the RTL8169S has one problem: overheating. If you buy any, make sure they include a heatsink. Those without a heatsink are prone to locking up if the temperatures inside your case get too high. Thanks. I'm going to use it in Italy, so I guess heat is a problem ... -- Timothy Murphy e-mail: gayleard /at/ eircom.net tel: +353-86-2336090, +353-1-2842366 s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] PCI ethernet card for CentOS
Thanks. I'm going to use it in Italy, so I guess heat is a problem ... I also use the Intel nics (usually the PCI-e version) and they are a lot more expensive, but they are an excellent card. By the way, some of those cards on ebay show a heatsink, but don't rely on the picture - make sure you ask the seller if it is included. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] IP6 Anyone?
Today I received an allocation of IP6 addresses for some servers. I can 'play' with the last 2 of the 8 IP6 address segments. I always thought, mistakenly, IP6 was 6 segments, because it was IP6. IP4 had 4 segments. However IP6 is actually IP version 6 and it has 8 segments. The other interesting discovers are: :: means one or more 0 segments, example :: can mean 0:0:0: or just 0:0: or even 0:0:0:0: and, a real smile making favourite, is IP6 breaks Micro$oft's set-up. Micro$oft can not handle actual IP6 addresses because : is forbidden by Micro$oft in its 'Uniform Naming Convention (UNC) path names'. Naturally Micro%oft has invented a 'work around' solution. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPv6_address#Literal_IPv6_addresses_in_UNC_path_names Because : is sometimes used in an address to indicate the start of a port number, example http://www.anyonejunk.com:1234, the IP6 address can be enclosed within [ ] with the port number remaining outside the square brackets. How will IP6 affect the software in Centos and what gradual changes should one make on the transition to a major Internet change with the ending of NAT for IP4 addresses and a more secure (IPsec) end to end transmission protocol? -- With best regards, Paul. England, EU. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] IP6 Anyone?
On 02/26/11 12:12 PM, Always Learning wrote: Because : is sometimes used in an address to indicate the start of a port number, examplehttp://www.anyonejunk.com:1234, the IP6 address can be enclosed within [ ] with the port number remaining outside the square brackets. Thats, MUST be enclosed within []... without those [ ], how would you resolve http://21DA:00D3::00FF:FE28:8080 is that... http://[21DA:00D3::::00FF:FE28:8080] or http://[21DA:00D3:::::00FF:FE28]:8080 ? Both of those are valid IPv6 addresses if anything, I'd put the blame on this squarely on the committee that decided to use : as the IPv6 seperator when it was already in wide use as the URL port separator. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] IP6 Anyone?
Am 26.02.2011 um 21:24 schrieb John R Pierce: On 02/26/11 12:12 PM, Always Learning wrote: Because : is sometimes used in an address to indicate the start of a port number, examplehttp://www.anyonejunk.com:1234, the IP6 address can be enclosed within [ ] with the port number remaining outside the square brackets. Thats, MUST be enclosed within []... without those [ ], how would you resolve http://21DA:00D3::00FF:FE28:8080 is that... http://[21DA:00D3::::00FF:FE28:8080] or http://[21DA:00D3:::::00FF:FE28]:8080 ? Both of those are valid IPv6 addresses if anything, I'd put the blame on this squarely on the committee that decided to use : as the IPv6 seperator when it was already in wide use as the URL port separator. With IPV6, you don't need to run it on a different port. Just bind it to a different IP in the same prefix ;-) So, that port-8080 stuff will be gone pretty soon. In a year or two. Cough-cough. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] IP6 Anyone?
On Sat, 2011-02-26 at 12:24 -0800, John R Pierce wrote: On 02/26/11 12:12 PM, Always Learning wrote: Because : is sometimes used in an address to indicate the start of a port number, example http://www.anyonejunk.com:1234, the IP6 address can be enclosed within [ ] with the port number remaining outside the square brackets. Thats, MUST be enclosed within []... without those [ ], how would you resolve http://21DA:00D3::00FF:FE28:8080 is that... http://[21DA:00D3::::00FF:FE28:8080] or http://[21DA:00D3:::::00FF:FE28]:8080 ? Both of those are valid IPv6 addresses if anything, I'd put the blame on this squarely on the committee that decided to use : as the IPv6 seperator when it was already in wide use as the URL port separator. What separator would you have chosen? \ (used by M$) / (used for directories etc.) : (used for port number) . (used by IP4) ; (widely used as a terminator) # ? = ? - ? _ ? ! ? ? (used in HTML and email addresses) (used in HTML and email addresses) , ? ^ ? % ? $ ? ~ ? What would anyone have chosen ? With best regards, Paul. England, EU. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] IP6 Anyone?
On Sat, 2011-02-26 at 21:33 +0100, Rainer Duffner wrote: With IPV6, you don't need to run it on a different port. Just bind it to a different IP in the same prefix ;-) So, that port-8080 stuff will be gone pretty soon. Very interesting point. In a year or two. Cough-cough. That long? With best regards, Paul. England, EU. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] IP6 Anyone?
On 02/26/11 12:33 PM, Rainer Duffner wrote: With IPV6, you don't need to run it on a different port. Just bind it to a different IP in the same prefix ;-) So, that port-8080 stuff will be gone pretty soon. In a year or two. Cough-cough. when I first saw the spec for IPv6 I mistakenly thought they'd done away with ports entirely, and that you'd just use an IP range for a server for different services... but that would be a mess for DNS, having to use a different hostname for ssh rather than http etc, a physical host would likely use a subdomain in that scheme (ssh.myhost.mydomain.com vs http.myhost.mydomain.com etc etc) ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] IP6 Anyone?
Always learning wrote: I always thought, mistakenly, IP6 was 6 segments, because it was IP6. IP4 had 4 segments. However IP6 is actually IP version 6 and it has 8 segments. I don't think I ever heard IP6, but always IPv6. Counting segments might not be as meaningful. IPv6 has twice (8) segments compared to IPv4 however each segment is 2 octets making IPv6 address space 4 times (128 bits) compared to IPv4 (32 bits). Thanks Sheraz Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] IP6 Anyone?
On Sat, 2011-02-26 at 12:41 -0800, John R Pierce wrote: On 02/26/11 12:33 PM, Rainer Duffner wrote: With IPV6, you don't need to run it on a different port. Just bind it to a different IP in the same prefix ;-) So, that port-8080 stuff will be gone pretty soon. In a year or two. Cough-cough. when I first saw the spec for IPv6 I mistakenly thought they'd done away with ports entirely, and that you'd just use an IP range for a server for different services... but that would be a mess for DNS, having to use a different hostname for ssh rather than http etc, a physical host would likely use a subdomain in that scheme (ssh.myhost.mydomain.com vs http.myhost.mydomain.com etc etc) When using a non-standard port on IP4, the hacker is not being pointed directly at a specific door with a live application behind it. Additionally if HTTP is operating on the same IP address, the hacker might think that is the only application at the address. With a unique IP6 address a hacker can be sure something is definitely there. Creating lots of dummy IP6 addresses to confuse hackers is not an ideal solution. -- With best regards, Paul. England, EU. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] IP6 Anyone?
On Sat, 2011-02-26 at 20:58 +, sheraz...@yahoo.com wrote: IPv6 has twice (8) segments compared to IPv4 however each segment is 2 octets making IPv6 address space 4 times (128 bits) compared to IPv4 (32 bits). Oct... means 8. Each segment of an IP6 segment can contain 4 hexadecimal digits. Hexadecimal means 0 to F. Are you sure 'octets' is correct? -- With best regards, Paul. England, EU. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] IP6 Anyone?
2 hex digits is 1 octet (or byte). On Feb 26, 2011, at 3:04 PM, Always Learning wrote: On Sat, 2011-02-26 at 20:58 +, sheraz...@yahoo.com wrote: IPv6 has twice (8) segments compared to IPv4 however each segment is 2 octets making IPv6 address space 4 times (128 bits) compared to IPv4 (32 bits). Oct... means 8. Each segment of an IP6 segment can contain 4 hexadecimal digits. Hexadecimal means 0 to F. Are you sure 'octets' is correct? -- With best regards, Paul. England, EU. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] IP6 Anyone?
Creating lots of dummy IP6 addresses to confuse hackers is not an ideal solution. scanning ports on an IP vs scanning IPs. whatever. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] IP6 Anyone?
IPv6 has twice (8) segments compared to IPv4 however each segment is 2 octets making IPv6 address space 4 times (128 bits) compared to IPv4 (32 bits). Oct... means 8. Each segment of an IP6 segment can contain 4 hexadecimal digits. Hexadecimal means 0 to F. Are you sure 'octets' is correct? 4 hex digits == 16 bits.2 octets == 2 * 8 = 16 bits. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] PCI ethernet card for CentOS
On Sat, Feb 26, 2011 at 10:28 AM, compdoc comp...@hotrodpc.com wrote: I see that there are many Realtek RTL8169S gigabit cards going for a song on eBay. I've always liked and used Realtek cards, and I use the RTL8169S in my servers. However, the RTL8169S has one problem: overheating. If you buy any, make sure they include a heatsink. Those without a heatsink are prone to locking up if the temperatures inside your case get too high. That just confirms my experiences. I've had issues with onboard Realtek cards and linux. On one desktop the Realtek card would work until the box was restarted. You would have to hard power it off and back on for it to work again. That same box worked fine with Windows. I stick with Intel for reliability and ease of use. You will find higher end motherboards mostly use Intel NICs. I've also had good experiences with onboard Broadcom NICs. For the price the Intel aren't much more. If you don't need gigabit, like in the original poster's case, then you can grab Intel 10/100 cards for cheap. Ryan ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] PCI ethernet card for CentOS
That just confirms my experiences. I've had issues with onboard Realtek cards and linux. On one desktop the Realtek card would work until the box was restarted. You would have to hard power it off and back on for it to work again. That same box worked fine with Windows. The old RTL8139 which is Realtek's 10/100 card have been rock solid for many years, and the RTL8169S gigabit cards are rock solid too, with a heatsink. You can't beat Realtek if you're on a budget. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] IP6 Anyone?
Octets Thanks for pointing-out my misunderstanding. I'll remember 2 octets are really 2 characters (IBM's bytes) = 2 digits, 4 octal numbers or 4 hexadecimal numbers. -- With best regards, Paul. England, EU. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] IP6 Anyone?
On 02/26/11 9:46 PM, Always Learning wrote: Octets Thanks for pointing-out my misunderstanding. I'll remember 2 octets are really 2 characters (IBM's bytes) = 2 digits, 4 octal numbers or 4 hexadecimal numbers. 4 octal (base 8) digits only represents 12 bits. byte oriented computers really don't fit into octal at all well ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
