Re: [expert] Server shuts down
When it "shuts down" what happens if you try to ssh into it. If it's a No response. Were talkin total lockup here. I have to restart. web server does it still serve web pages? If it does I'd be inclined to It is not a webserver. suspect that perhaps apm or APIC (hope I got the right acronym here.) is trying to put the box to sleep. If so turn off or even remove apm from the box and boot with an append of "noapic". Done this already. It is covered in Mandrake errata. I'm thinking now that it may be a network issue that is causeing the problem rather than a video issue. Cable service in this town sux and is up and down frequently. Although I may be wrong, sometimes trouble on the network seems to coincide with the shutdown. Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [expert] Server shuts down
When it "shuts down" what happens if you try to ssh into it. If it's a web server does it still serve web pages? If it does I'd be inclined to suspect that perhaps apm or APIC (hope I got the right acronym here.) is trying to put the box to sleep. If so turn off or even remove apm from the box and boot with an append of "noapic". James On Fri, 2002-10-25 at 00:06, Jim C wrote: > My server shuts down (or perhaps goes to sleep and doesn't wake?) after > being left for a while. This occurs apparently at random. Now I do > have the Diamond Savage card in that machine which has had shutdown > issues as mentioned in errata but the measures mentioned on the sight > have not fixed the problem. > > Clue anybody? > > > > > > Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? > Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
[expert] Server shuts down
My server shuts down (or perhaps goes to sleep and doesn't wake?) after being left for a while. This occurs apparently at random. Now I do have the Diamond Savage card in that machine which has had shutdown issues as mentioned in errata but the measures mentioned on the sight have not fixed the problem. Clue anybody? Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [expert] Server performance - OT
Not to sound too harsh on the person who quoted the hardware configuration, but this sounds more like a hackers dream game setup than a low-end server configuration. If you want a stable platform, you might want to ask others who have actually setup servers. AMD might be okay for some cases, but I am not sure if it is mature enough to be reliable for a mission critical server. I would guess that most vendors supplying 32-bit Intel compatible server platforms are going to go with Intel processors, probably Xeon processors in a dual CPU configuration. If you use AMD, you will only be able to use the MP processors in a dual CPU configuration, unless you like hacking XP CPUs to make them work (not recommended). My advice: ask someone who knows what they are doing. I doubt that this is the best place for such advice (although I'm sure their are exceptions). Ashley Moore wrote: >I'm going to put together a server, based on Mdk 8.2 for a friend >(mainly to host a few of his sites from), he's recd a quote for the same >with this h/w: > >Gigabit Mobo - dual cpu - AMD >1 GB RAM >Adaptec Raid 5 controller >RAID array of 6 x 70 gb SCSI with one hot swap >D-link wireless lan > >any views/problems that I should be aware of? >this is the first time i'd be installing linux on this class of h/w, so >any help is most welcome. >also, should i just install Linux directly on the RAID or keep aside a >small ide drive to install the o/s. > >cheers, > Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [expert] Server performance - OT
Yes. No. Maybe so. To start with the hardware: Last I heard, and read, there was really only one motherboard for dual AMD chips. Tyan makes it. It comes with onboard damn near everything. RAID, IDE controller, and dual 3com NICs. I think it's like $650 or so. This may have changed, I've not been searching recently. But from what I read about that board, if you can afford it, it should more then do the job for you! You're going to be running a server, with dual AMD XPs most likely. I'd guess in the 1600+ range. Get as much RAM as the board can take. 1 GB of DDR is pretty cheap. (Especially in comparison to what's spent on Mobo and CPUs.) If the board above does indeed have a RAID controller, you won't need the adaptec RAID card. So it helps make the Mobo more worth it. But, from the price of 6 70Gb SCSI drives, I don't think the price of the Mobo will be an issue. So, depending on how you run the RAID, I would suggest puttin the OS on the RAID. Makes it a lot faster to access things. But why go with this beefed up hardware, but then limit the bandwidth to/from the server? Wireless is only 11Mb. If you need all this hardware, go at least with 100Mb ethernet network connection. If affordable, go with GIGAnet. So do some searchs, get the information then check local computer stores to see what they have and can offer. Last I checked, the Tyan Mobo is something you'd have to order. Of course Crucial.com for the RAM. Compare prices. Talk to vendors. You're making a big purchace, they may give you a price break if you buy EVERYTHING from them. Local computer stores are good for deals like that. Hope that helps a little! tdh -- T. Holmes | UNIXTECHS.org | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | UIN: 17021091 | I'm going to put together a server, based on Mdk 8.2 for a friend | (mainly to host a few of his sites from), he's recd a quote for the same | with this h/w: | | Gigabit Mobo - dual cpu - AMD | 1 GB RAM | Adaptec Raid 5 controller | RAID array of 6 x 70 gb SCSI with one hot swap | D-link wireless lan | | any views/problems that I should be aware of? | this is the first time i'd be installing linux on this class of h/w, so | any help is most welcome. | also, should i just install Linux directly on the RAID or keep aside a | small ide drive to install the o/s. | | cheers, | | -- | Ashley Moore. | CCNP,MCP,CNE. | - | Linux User#229125 | - `--- Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
[expert] Server performance - OT
I'm going to put together a server, based on Mdk 8.2 for a friend (mainly to host a few of his sites from), he's recd a quote for the same with this h/w: Gigabit Mobo - dual cpu - AMD 1 GB RAM Adaptec Raid 5 controller RAID array of 6 x 70 gb SCSI with one hot swap D-link wireless lan any views/problems that I should be aware of? this is the first time i'd be installing linux on this class of h/w, so any help is most welcome. also, should i just install Linux directly on the RAID or keep aside a small ide drive to install the o/s. cheers, -- Ashley Moore. CCNP,MCP,CNE. - Linux User#229125 - signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [expert] Server
Robert Boggs wrote: > > I finally got it to see my name, but it is still not letting the network see > my files. What am I doing wrong in the SWAT program? If you are expecting to "share" files between Linux and Windows, make sure encription is turned on... -- J. Craig Woods UNIX/NT SA -Art is the illusion of spontaneity- Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [expert] Server
I finally got it to see my name, but it is still not letting the network see my files. What am I doing wrong in the SWAT program? - Original Message - From: "Dave Sherman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Mandrake-expert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, December 02, 2001 11:43 AM Subject: Re: [expert] Server > On Sun, 2001-12-02 at 09:55, Robert Boggs wrote: > > Could someone tell me how to make MY files accessable to my network. I have > > samba working, in that I can mount any ot the other computers drives, > > however they still cannot see my drives. HILP, Please. I want to use 'Drake > > almost all of the time, however at this time, I cannot, due to my wife > > needing to access my 2 storeage drives. THANKS RB > > Robert, > > If you are wanting to create a simple public folder that is available to > all the users on your network, add this to your /etc/smb.conf file: > > # A publicly accessible directory > [public] >comment = Public Stuff >path = /home/public >public = yes >writable = yes >printable = no >valid users = dave, carrie > > Note that the directory /home/public must exist, and must have > read/write/execute permissions for for everyone: > chmod 777 /home/public > > This way, Samba users will be able to use it. > > For your "valid users", you must have Samba user accounts setup on the > Linux machine. In my case, "dave" and "carrie" are the actual linux user > accounts as well as the samba user accounts. If you don't know the > difference, I would recommend reading the Samba documentation included > with Samba. > > In any case, to create a Samba user account, as root: > smbadduser username > > The smbadduser script will walk you through setting up your user and > password, and this is the user name you will use in the "valid users" > section. They do not need to be the same as a real Linux user account, > although in my case they are the same. > > Dave > -- > consultant, n.: > Someone who knowns 101 ways to make love, but can't get a date. > > > > Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? > Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com > Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [expert] Server
Dave Sherman wrote: >On Sun, 2001-12-02 at 09:55, Robert Boggs wrote: > >>Could someone tell me how to make MY files accessable to my network. I have >>samba working, in that I can mount any ot the other computers drives, >>however they still cannot see my drives. HILP, Please. I want to use 'Drake >>almost all of the time, however at this time, I cannot, due to my wife >>needing to access my 2 storeage drives. THANKS RB >> > >Robert, > >If you are wanting to create a simple public folder that is available to >all the users on your network, add this to your /etc/smb.conf file: > ># A publicly accessible directory >[public] > comment = Public Stuff > path = /home/public > public = yes > writable = yes > printable = no > valid users = dave, carrie > >Note that the directory /home/public must exist, and must have >read/write/execute permissions for for everyone: > chmod 777 /home/public > >This way, Samba users will be able to use it. > >For your "valid users", you must have Samba user accounts setup on the >Linux machine. In my case, "dave" and "carrie" are the actual linux user >accounts as well as the samba user accounts. If you don't know the >difference, I would recommend reading the Samba documentation included >with Samba. > >In any case, to create a Samba user account, as root: > smbadduser username > >The smbadduser script will walk you through setting up your user and >password, and this is the user name you will use in the "valid users" >section. They do not need to be the same as a real Linux user account, >although in my case they are the same. > >Dave > > > > >Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? >Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com > And smb service must be running Salu2 óscar. Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [expert] Server
On Sun, 2001-12-02 at 09:55, Robert Boggs wrote: > Could someone tell me how to make MY files accessable to my network. I have > samba working, in that I can mount any ot the other computers drives, > however they still cannot see my drives. HILP, Please. I want to use 'Drake > almost all of the time, however at this time, I cannot, due to my wife > needing to access my 2 storeage drives. THANKS RB Robert, If you are wanting to create a simple public folder that is available to all the users on your network, add this to your /etc/smb.conf file: # A publicly accessible directory [public] comment = Public Stuff path = /home/public public = yes writable = yes printable = no valid users = dave, carrie Note that the directory /home/public must exist, and must have read/write/execute permissions for for everyone: chmod 777 /home/public This way, Samba users will be able to use it. For your "valid users", you must have Samba user accounts setup on the Linux machine. In my case, "dave" and "carrie" are the actual linux user accounts as well as the samba user accounts. If you don't know the difference, I would recommend reading the Samba documentation included with Samba. In any case, to create a Samba user account, as root: smbadduser username The smbadduser script will walk you through setting up your user and password, and this is the user name you will use in the "valid users" section. They do not need to be the same as a real Linux user account, although in my case they are the same. Dave -- consultant, n.: Someone who knowns 101 ways to make love, but can't get a date. Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [expert] Server
open up /etc/xinetd.d/swat in your favorite editor, change "disable = yes" to "disable = no", restart xinetd (service xinetd restart). Now open up http://localhost:901/ in your favorite browser and set the configuration as you like it. When you're done, "service samba restart". -- Asheesh. On Sun, 2 Dec 2001, Robert Boggs wrote: > Could someone tell me how to make MY files accessable to my network. I have > samba working, in that I can mount any ot the other computers drives, > however they still cannot see my drives. HILP, Please. I want to use 'Drake > almost all of the time, however at this time, I cannot, due to my wife > needing to access my 2 storeage drives. THANKS RB > - Original Message - > From: "Robert Boggs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Robert Boggs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2001 11:17 AM > Subject: Re: [expert] Server > > > > On Tuesday 27 November 2001 10:22 pm, you wrote: > > Turns out the problem with her tcpip was a little program for windows > called > > zone alarm. Got that snag fixed.> On Tuesday 27 November 2001 10:16 pm, > you > > wrote: > > > Well, my wife's machine will not instsll tcpip. I don't know why, but > due > > > to the very expensive Jaws for windows, i Really cannot replace it.> Why > > > NetBui? Why not change your winblows machines to tcp/ip? Seems a heck > > > > > > > of alot easier. > > > > > > > > On Tuesday 27 November 2001 19:02, you wrote: > > > > > I have a small network using netbui, and I would like to make it > work > > > > > in linux. My wife has to use windows, because she is blind, and so > far, > > > > > no program has been setup for talking in X KDE or Gnome. I would > like > > > > > to know how to set this up. You may reply to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; name="message.footer" > > > > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit > > > > Content-Description: > > > > > > > > > > > Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [expert] Server
Could someone tell me how to make MY files accessable to my network. I have samba working, in that I can mount any ot the other computers drives, however they still cannot see my drives. HILP, Please. I want to use 'Drake almost all of the time, however at this time, I cannot, due to my wife needing to access my 2 storeage drives. THANKS RB - Original Message - From: "Robert Boggs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Robert Boggs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2001 11:17 AM Subject: Re: [expert] Server > On Tuesday 27 November 2001 10:22 pm, you wrote: > Turns out the problem with her tcpip was a little program for windows called > zone alarm. Got that snag fixed.> On Tuesday 27 November 2001 10:16 pm, you > wrote: > > Well, my wife's machine will not instsll tcpip. I don't know why, but due > > to the very expensive Jaws for windows, i Really cannot replace it.> Why > > NetBui? Why not change your winblows machines to tcp/ip? Seems a heck > > > > > of alot easier. > > > > > > On Tuesday 27 November 2001 19:02, you wrote: > > > > I have a small network using netbui, and I would like to make it work > > > > in linux. My wife has to use windows, because she is blind, and so far, > > > > no program has been setup for talking in X KDE or Gnome. I would like > > > > to know how to set this up. You may reply to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; name="message.footer" > > > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit > > > Content-Description: > > > > Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [expert] Server
I am not sure how far along this project is, I haven't followed it to closely, but this site: http://www.enabling.org/linux.html Has some linux links to various speech output projects, one of them is BLINUX which is dedicated to supporting Linux for the blind. I know this doesn't answer the networking question, but it may offer a linux solution for your wife. On Tue, 2001-11-27 at 22:02, Robert Boggs wrote: > I have a small network using netbui, and I would like to make it work in > linux. My wife has to use windows, because she is blind, and so far, no > program has been setup for talking in X KDE or Gnome. I would like to know > how to set this up. You may reply to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? > Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [expert] Server
Robert Boggs wrote: > > I have a small network using netbui, and I would like to make it work in > linux. My wife has to use windows, because she is blind, and so far, no > program has been setup for talking in X KDE or Gnome. I would like to know > how to set this up. You may reply to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Begin by looking at setting up Linux as your firewall/gateway machine, and then set this box up to be your Samba Server. There is a lot of documentation on the web for this kind of a setup. J. Craig Woods UNIX SA Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [expert] Server
Why NetBui? Why not change your winblows machines to tcp/ip? Seems a heck of alot easier. On Tuesday 27 November 2001 19:02, you wrote: > I have a small network using netbui, and I would like to make it work in > linux. My wife has to use windows, because she is blind, and so far, no > program has been setup for talking in X KDE or Gnome. I would like to know > how to set this up. You may reply to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; name="message.footer" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Description: Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
[expert] Server
I have a small network using netbui, and I would like to make it work in linux. My wife has to use windows, because she is blind, and so far, no program has been setup for talking in X KDE or Gnome. I would like to know how to set this up. You may reply to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
RE: [expert] Server Installation
DONT tell it to use the master boot record when you do the install. Do it by hand afterwards. Derek Stark IT / Linux Admin eSupportNow xt 8952 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Laurent Duperval Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2001 9:51 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [expert] Server Installation On 17 Jan, Luca Braglia wrote: > Hi All, > > The system I have is a pentium 200 Mhz with one hard disk ( master ) and I > dual boot with grub between windoze 98 and workstation MDK 7.2 . > Now I have another hard disk ( slave ) wich I would like to fully dedicate > to linux in a server installation. > > My question is: > > it is possible to do a server installation on the second hard disk without > compromizing the actual system ( W98 and MDK 7.2 ) so that I will be able to > choose to boot between windoze, MDK workstation and MDK server ? > > The server installation will be used for didactical purpose only and not as > a real server. > > Thank you so much for any reply > > Best Regards > > Luca > http://home.sunrise.ch/braglia > > > > > > > It should be. I haven't tried it but just boot with your LM CD and install to the other disk. You may want to modify you LILO or grub configuration by hand to add the new boot partitions for your server. L -- MY EMAIL ADDRESS HAS CHANGED --> UPDATE YOUR ADDRESSBOOK Laurent Duperval "Montreal winters are an intelligence test, Netergy Networks - Java Centerand we who are here have failed it." Phone: (514) 282-8484 ext. 228 -Doug Camilli mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Penguin Power!
Re: [expert] Server Installation
On 17 Jan, Luca Braglia wrote: > Hi All, > > The system I have is a pentium 200 Mhz with one hard disk ( master ) and I > dual boot with grub between windoze 98 and workstation MDK 7.2 . > Now I have another hard disk ( slave ) wich I would like to fully dedicate > to linux in a server installation. > > My question is: > > it is possible to do a server installation on the second hard disk without > compromizing the actual system ( W98 and MDK 7.2 ) so that I will be able to > choose to boot between windoze, MDK workstation and MDK server ? > > The server installation will be used for didactical purpose only and not as > a real server. > > Thank you so much for any reply > > Best Regards > > Luca > http://home.sunrise.ch/braglia > > > > > > > It should be. I haven't tried it but just boot with your LM CD and install to the other disk. You may want to modify you LILO or grub configuration by hand to add the new boot partitions for your server. L -- MY EMAIL ADDRESS HAS CHANGED --> UPDATE YOUR ADDRESSBOOK Laurent Duperval "Montreal winters are an intelligence test, Netergy Networks - Java Centerand we who are here have failed it." Phone: (514) 282-8484 ext. 228 -Doug Camilli mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Penguin Power!
[expert] Server Installation
Hi All, The system I have is a pentium 200 Mhz with one hard disk ( master ) and I dual boot with grub between windoze 98 and workstation MDK 7.2 . Now I have another hard disk ( slave ) wich I would like to fully dedicate to linux in a server installation. My question is: it is possible to do a server installation on the second hard disk without compromizing the actual system ( W98 and MDK 7.2 ) so that I will be able to choose to boot between windoze, MDK workstation and MDK server ? The server installation will be used for didactical purpose only and not as a real server. Thank you so much for any reply Best Regards Luca http://home.sunrise.ch/braglia
Re: [expert] Server suspend
I'm not sure what all of the suggestions before were, so here's a checklist of places I'd check: 1. BIOS power save mode - Disable 2. Kernel apm setting - Disable 3. apmd - Disable 4. If you are running X, make sure DPMS is disabled On Mon, 20 Nov 2000, Juan Luis Baptiste wrote: > Hi, > > I'm still having problems with my server not responding after a big idle > time, the network stops responding and the clock stops too, when I come back > the next day the clok it's delayed and all the entire office can't connect to > the Internet until I go to the console and restart the network and change the > clock to the actual time again. > > What could it be? > > I'm running LM7.2 with ip-masquerading on a PIII 600 256MB ram. > > Thanks. > -- > >>>NEXT MEDIA INTERACTIVE<<< > > Juan Luis Baptiste > Ingeniero de Desarrollo > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Dir: Calle 98 9 - 03 P.2 > Tel: 57 1 218 Ext. 339 > BOGOTA - COLOMBIA > > John Kim Linux System Engineer @ ASL - visit us at www.aslab.com Keep in touch with http://mandrakeforum.com: Subscribe the "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" mailing list.
[expert] Server suspend
Hi, I'm still having problems with my server not responding after a big idle time, the network stops responding and the clock stops too, when I come back the next day the clok it's delayed and all the entire office can't connect to the Internet until I go to the console and restart the network and change the clock to the actual time again. What could it be? I'm running LM7.2 with ip-masquerading on a PIII 600 256MB ram. Thanks. -- >>>NEXT MEDIA INTERACTIVE<<< Juan Luis Baptiste Ingeniero de Desarrollo [EMAIL PROTECTED] Dir: Calle 98 9 - 03 P.2 Tel: 57 1 218 Ext. 339 BOGOTA - COLOMBIA Keep in touch with http://mandrakeforum.com: Subscribe the "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" mailing list.
[expert] server suspend
Hi, I'm having another problem with 7.2, possibly a configuration problem, but I don't know how to slove it. I got ip-masquerading running, and when the server is idle for a long time it stops responding, until someone goes to the console and does something. I was told that the problem was related with apmd but I don't got it installed, so I don't know what to do, if someone can give me a clue... thanks. -- >>>NEXT MEDIA INTERACTIVE<<< Juan Luis Baptiste Ingeniero de Desarrollo [EMAIL PROTECTED] Dir: Calle 98 9 - 03 P.2 Tel: 57 1 218 Ext. 339 BOGOTA - COLOMBIA Keep in touch with http://mandrakeforum.com: Subscribe the "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" mailing list.
Re: [expert] Server Partitioning
On Thursday 09 November 2000 13:12, you wrote: > should know of any special considerations before I set up the > partitions. I hope this being Monday, and your e-mail being from Thursday, this isn't going to be a day late and a dollar short but oh well. First of all, I suggest taking a look at the FHS at http://www.pathname.com/fhs/ . It has the latest file hierarchy infomation for Linux. The distros may not yet be 100% compliant, but you can be :) On the partitioning there are two major things to keep in mind, the file system structure and the physical disks. My partition tables usually look something like this /boot 15MB /var 400MB /swap128MB /tmp 400MB /home2GB /usr 2GB / 1GB The sizes are obviously not the same but are included to show relationally rough size comparisions. Its good sense to put /var on a separate partition so if a log runs rampant you won't fill your root filesystem and not be able to log in. Putting /home on a separate partition will allow you to keep data across new installs, but keep in mind the uid/gid problems that may occur from doing that. The /usr partition is where I install most third party software, until people can agree on the use of the /opt vs. the use of /usr, I leave /opt alone since not much touches it right now. I segregate /tmp for the same reason as /var, something runs rampant in the /tmp directory, it only fills the /tmp partition. And /boot I keep out because I still haven't upgraded lilo and need to put it in the first 1024 cylinders :) The physical disk structure is also something to take into account. I have built more workstations than home boxen (even my home boxen tend to be workstations) so I put partitions that access speed is more critical closer to the spindle, i.e. in the lower cylinder ranges. This may be a tweak that has no real impact on performance and disk access times, but it makes me feel better :) That's what I think a decent partitioning scheme is, but I would like to hear what other people have to say. Hope this isn't too late and helps. Keep in touch with http://mandrakeforum.com: Subscribe the "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" mailing list.
[expert] Server Partitioning
I am going to convert my NT PDC to a LM 7.2 system this weekend and I will be running Samba as the software for windows print and file share. I have done several Linux systems in the past, but I was wondering if I should know of any special considerations before I set up the partitions. Also I want to do a full developer install since it will be my primary home machine Thanks .. Charley Sparks Keep in touch with http://mandrakeforum.com: Subscribe the "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" mailing list.
Re: [expert] server migration RH -> MDK
On Mon Oct 16, 2000 at 04:58:37PM +0200, Buchan Milne wrote: > > While I agree it may be unnecessary to switch distros if your previous > > distro does the server jobs you need done, to say that Mandrake > > doesn't make a fantastic server is nonsense. > > The other advantage is that running the same OS on your workstations as > your servers means you only have to learn the quirks of one distro, not > two. Plus, I wouldn't want to be without MandrakeUpdate, which I can > even run with ssh and the weirdx Xserver from my Desktop machine when I > am running windblows! Yes, there is the benefit of only having to learn/deal with one distro. At one time I was running Mandrake on a few machines and SuSE on another... I began to dread whenever I worked on the SuSE machine because of how different it was. Happily, it's a Mandrake machine once again so working on all of them is a cinch. > In the end you need to weigh up the effort you will save against the > effort you will spend. I haven't the time to migrate my last redhat box > (our printserver/intranetserver/cd-writing server), so when I needed > php/MySQL/frontpage extensions, I just installed Mandrakes packages ! I've done this before too... =) I have a client who uses RH6.2 for his web/everything server and I'm often putting mandrake packages on there for him... The next time it dies (hopefully not for a long time!) I'm going to convince him to use Corporate Server or something similar on there because I hate working on his machine... =) -- [EMAIL PROTECTED], OpenPGP key available on www.keyserver.net // Danen Consulting Serviceswww.danen.net, www.freezer-burn.org // MandrakeSoft, Inc. www.linux-mandrake.com 1024D/FE6F2AFD 88D8 0D23 8D4B 3407 5BD7 66F9 2043 D0E5 FE6F 2AFD Current Linux uptime: 1 hour 7 minutes. Keep in touch with http://mandrakeforum.com: Subscribe the "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" mailing list.
Re: [expert] server migration RH -> MDK
Christopher Kolar wrote: > [snip] > > I would also like to agree with Buchan on the Apache issue. We are running > some True64 boxes as web servers, and there is some degree of pain getting > the sysadmins to run mySQL/php/mod_perl/Apache with IMAPpy things thrown > in. I am able to do more things faster, and I am not even a real sysadmin. I'm not a sysadmin at all (really an engineering student) but I run a network of +- 40 machines (about 35 NT WS) with 5 Linux boxes, of which 4 are LM 7.1, 1 is still RH6.2. The machines are configured as follows: 1)Celeron 500 w/ 128 MB Ram: LM 7.1 Samba 2.0.7 as Primary Domain Controller for our Windows NT domain 2)P166 MMX w/ 80MB Ram: LM 7.1 Apache (servers http://www.cae.co.za and https://mail.cae.sun.ac.za) w/ PHP3/MySQL/mod-imap and 3 different webmail interfaces being evaluated Wu IMAP } Postfix }(will start to serve all our mail) 3)P60 w/ 32MB ram LM 7.1 Webcam machine 4)P75 w/32 MB ram: RH6.2 samba 2.0.7, running as a printserver apache (using Mdk rpms) doing intranet serving WebCDWriter (this is about the coolest linux app ever) We have a few of the windows boxes dual/multi-boot to Mandrake also. Setting this up part-time since May this year, I now have a network with a Windows NT Domain (seriuosly eases admin work), reliable servers, mail available securely via SSL'ed webmail, anyone capable of writing a CD from their workstation from any Netscape capable OS. To do all this in any other OS would have cost about $4000 for server software (windblows) or would have take a lot longer (RH) Best of all it's very little work to keep them all up to date, since we have a (non-official) Manrdrake mirror on our netowrk (we also have an official redhat mirror, but it's a mission to update everything). Buchan > Cheers, > > --chris > > > Keep in touch with http://mandrakeforum.com: > Subscribe the "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" mailing list. -- |--| Buchan MilneMechanical Engineer, Network Manager Cellphone +27824722231 email mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Centre for Automotive Engineering http://www.cae.co.za South Africas first satellite:http://sunsat.ee.sun.ac.za Control Models http://www.control.co.za |Registered Linux User #182071-| Keep in touch with http://mandrakeforum.com: Subscribe the "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" mailing list.
Re: [expert] server migration RH -> MDK
At 09:58 AM 10/16/2000, Buchan Milne wrote: >Vincent Danen wrote: > > On Fri Oct 13, 2000 at 06:35:45PM -0400, Greg Stewart wrote: >[snip] > > > > While I agree it may be unnecessary to switch distros if your previous > > distro does the server jobs you need done, to say that Mandrake > > doesn't make a fantastic server is nonsense. > >The other advantage is that running the same OS on your workstations as >your servers means you only have to learn the quirks of one distro, not >two. Plus, I wouldn't want to be without MandrakeUpdate, which I can >even run with ssh and the weirdx Xserver from my Desktop machine when I >am running windblows! Original poster here: thanks everyone for the followups. The issue here is that over the past year I have been rolling out Mandrake boxen because they make it easy for novice types to assist in the running/maintenance of basic stuff. The reason for bringing the original RH box over to Mandrake would be to get it onto the same distro as other boxes that we are using. MandrakeUpdate does play a part in the decision, automating updates enough but not too much. I would also like to agree with Buchan on the Apache issue. We are running some True64 boxes as web servers, and there is some degree of pain getting the sysadmins to run mySQL/php/mod_perl/Apache with IMAPpy things thrown in. I am able to do more things faster, and I am not even a real sysadmin. Cheers, --chris Keep in touch with http://mandrakeforum.com: Subscribe the "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" mailing list.
Re: [expert] server migration RH -> MDK
Vincent Danen wrote: > > On Fri Oct 13, 2000 at 06:35:45PM -0400, Greg Stewart wrote: > [snip] > > While I agree it may be unnecessary to switch distros if your previous > distro does the server jobs you need done, to say that Mandrake > doesn't make a fantastic server is nonsense. The other advantage is that running the same OS on your workstations as your servers means you only have to learn the quirks of one distro, not two. Plus, I wouldn't want to be without MandrakeUpdate, which I can even run with ssh and the weirdx Xserver from my Desktop machine when I am running windblows! In the end you need to weigh up the effort you will save against the effort you will spend. I haven't the time to migrate my last redhat box (our printserver/intranetserver/cd-writing server), so when I needed php/MySQL/frontpage extensions, I just installed Mandrakes packages ! Buchan > -- > [EMAIL PROTECTED], OpenPGP key available on www.keyserver.net > // Danen Consulting Serviceswww.danen.net, www.freezer-burn.org > // MandrakeSoft, Inc. www.linux-mandrake.com > 1024D/FE6F2AFD 88D8 0D23 8D4B 3407 5BD7 66F9 2043 D0E5 FE6F 2AFD > > Current Linux uptime: 23 hours 14 minutes. > > > Keep in touch with http://mandrakeforum.com: > Subscribe the "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" mailing list. -- |--| Buchan MilneMechanical Engineer, Network Manager Cellphone +27824722231 email mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Centre for Automotive Engineering http://www.cae.co.za South Africas first satellite:http://sunsat.ee.sun.ac.za Control Models http://www.control.co.za |Registered Linux User #182071-| Keep in touch with http://mandrakeforum.com: Subscribe the "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" mailing list.
Re: [expert] server migration RH -> MDK
On Fri Oct 13, 2000 at 11:48:10PM -0400, Greg Stewart wrote: > "to say that Mandrake doesn't make a fantastic server is nonsense." > > I don't believe that's what I said... No, you're right... I may have said that the wrong way... to me, Mandrake makes a fantastic server. Perhaps I should have said "to imply" instead of "to say". I would really like to know why tou think that the security features get in the way of your customization/configuration, however. If there is something we can fix or enhance, we would like to know about it. I have yet to find anything getting in the way of me doing anything I want to with the server (unless I set it to paranoid security). I'd like to know what your problems (frustration maybe?) with it is, if you don't mind. > > On Fri Oct 13, 2000 at 06:35:45PM -0400, Greg Stewart wrote: > > > > > Actually, I agree: Don't fix what ain't broke--Red Hat is (still) > developed > > > as a server OS, where Mandrake makes a better Workstation OS--although > there > > > are security features to help "lock down" a Mandrake server that are > > > installed in MDK7.1 by default, I have found them to get in the way of > > > customisation/configuration. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED], OpenPGP key available on www.keyserver.net // Danen Consulting Serviceswww.danen.net, www.freezer-burn.org // MandrakeSoft, Inc. www.linux-mandrake.com 1024D/FE6F2AFD 88D8 0D23 8D4B 3407 5BD7 66F9 2043 D0E5 FE6F 2AFD Current Linux uptime: 1 day 1 hour 34 minutes. Keep in touch with http://mandrakeforum.com: Subscribe the "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" mailing list.
Re: [expert] server migration RH -> MDK
"to say that Mandrake doesn't make a fantastic server is nonsense." I don't believe that's what I said... --Greg - Original Message - From: "Vincent Danen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > On Fri Oct 13, 2000 at 06:35:45PM -0400, Greg Stewart wrote: > > > Actually, I agree: Don't fix what ain't broke--Red Hat is (still) developed > > as a server OS, where Mandrake makes a better Workstation OS--although there > > are security features to help "lock down" a Mandrake server that are > > installed in MDK7.1 by default, I have found them to get in the way of > > customisation/configuration. > > I don't quite agree with this. I've been using Mandrake since 6.0 for > both server and desktop and have yet to find anything to do the job > better. Mandrake gives me all the tools I need and want for a > full-fledged domain hosting server (email, ftp, http, dns, dhcp, etc.) > and I haven't looked back since 6.0. While I can't say if RedHat is > better or worse with 6.x or 7.0 (I went from RH 5.1 to Mdk 6.0), I can > definately attest to three servers running flawlessly with Mandrake > and less hassle than a Red Hat server. I've done some work for a > client on a RH 6.1 machine that cause more problems than any of my > Mandrake servers ever did. > > While I agree it may be unnecessary to switch distros if your previous > distro does the server jobs you need done, to say that Mandrake > doesn't make a fantastic server is nonsense. > > -- > [EMAIL PROTECTED], OpenPGP key available on www.keyserver.net > // Danen Consulting Serviceswww.danen.net, www.freezer-burn.org > // MandrakeSoft, Inc. www.linux-mandrake.com > 1024D/FE6F2AFD 88D8 0D23 8D4B 3407 5BD7 66F9 2043 D0E5 FE6F 2AFD > > Current Linux uptime: 23 hours 14 minutes. > > > Keep in touch with http://mandrakeforum.com: > Subscribe the "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" mailing list. > __ Vous avez un site perso ? 2 millions de francs à gagner sur i(france) ! Webmasters : ZE CONCOURS ! http://www.ifrance.com/_reloc/concours.emailif Keep in touch with http://mandrakeforum.com: Subscribe the "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" mailing list.
Re: [expert] server migration RH -> MDK
On Fri Oct 13, 2000 at 06:35:45PM -0400, Greg Stewart wrote: > Actually, I agree: Don't fix what ain't broke--Red Hat is (still) developed > as a server OS, where Mandrake makes a better Workstation OS--although there > are security features to help "lock down" a Mandrake server that are > installed in MDK7.1 by default, I have found them to get in the way of > customisation/configuration. I don't quite agree with this. I've been using Mandrake since 6.0 for both server and desktop and have yet to find anything to do the job better. Mandrake gives me all the tools I need and want for a full-fledged domain hosting server (email, ftp, http, dns, dhcp, etc.) and I haven't looked back since 6.0. While I can't say if RedHat is better or worse with 6.x or 7.0 (I went from RH 5.1 to Mdk 6.0), I can definately attest to three servers running flawlessly with Mandrake and less hassle than a Red Hat server. I've done some work for a client on a RH 6.1 machine that cause more problems than any of my Mandrake servers ever did. While I agree it may be unnecessary to switch distros if your previous distro does the server jobs you need done, to say that Mandrake doesn't make a fantastic server is nonsense. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED], OpenPGP key available on www.keyserver.net // Danen Consulting Serviceswww.danen.net, www.freezer-burn.org // MandrakeSoft, Inc. www.linux-mandrake.com 1024D/FE6F2AFD 88D8 0D23 8D4B 3407 5BD7 66F9 2043 D0E5 FE6F 2AFD Current Linux uptime: 23 hours 14 minutes. Keep in touch with http://mandrakeforum.com: Subscribe the "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" mailing list.
Re: [expert] server migration RH -> MDK
Actually, I agree: Don't fix what ain't broke--Red Hat is (still) developed as a server OS, where Mandrake makes a better Workstation OS--although there are security features to help "lock down" a Mandrake server that are installed in MDK7.1 by default, I have found them to get in the way of customisation/configuration. I run RH6.2 with the 2.2.16 kernel on my firewall, and a server at work, and I don't intend to change it. I have had far less difficulty configuing RH than MDK, possibly due to my RH experience, but I don't see much of a difference between the two aside from MDK's security implementation. I've had my gripes about the desktop configuration as well, but I won't get into that. Definitely check your kernel version and upgrade to the new security-fixed 2.2.16 if you have not already done. But migrating to a different distro is of no use unless there are specific needs that cannot be met by the current OS. --Greg - Original Message - From: "Joseph S. Gardner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Christopher Kolar wrote: > > > I have an old server that is running RH and has been updated through > > 6.1. I am thinking about having its life start anew using Mandrake > > 7.1 or CS 1.0 and would appreciate any thoughts or experiences that > > others have had managing such a migration. > > > > The server is really performing three tasks: > > > >* Running as a pop3 mail server. > >* Running as a low-volume web server. > >* Running primary DNS for a couple of domains. > > > > Migration of the web server and DNS is pretty straightforward. I was > > wondering if there are any issues to consider when migrating the user > > accounts? I am assuming that if I copy of the /etc/passwd, > > /etc/shadow, and groups data then the accounts will operate nicely > > under the new system. I would appreciate knowing if I am overlooking > > anything. > > > > Thanks in advance, > > > > --chris > > My question would be why fix something that isn't broken? Since you're > not using the unit as a workstation then you're loosing any real > benefits of changing over to LM. Just my humble opinion and your > mileage may vary. > > > -- > Joseph S Gardner > > Senior Designer / Technical Support > Kirby Co., Cleveland, OH > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > The box said, > "Requires Windows 3.x or better", > so I got Linux. > > Registered Linux user #1696600 > > > > > Keep in touch with http://mandrakeforum.com: > Subscribe the "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" mailing list. > __ Vous avez un site perso ? 2 millions de francs à gagner sur i(france) ! Webmasters : ZE CONCOURS ! http://www.ifrance.com/_reloc/concours.emailif Keep in touch with http://mandrakeforum.com: Subscribe the "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" mailing list.
Re: [expert] server migration RH -> MDK
Christopher Kolar wrote: > I have an old server that is running RH and has been updated through > 6.1. I am thinking about having its life start anew using Mandrake > 7.1 or CS 1.0 and would appreciate any thoughts or experiences that > others have had managing such a migration. > > The server is really performing three tasks: > >* Running as a pop3 mail server. >* Running as a low-volume web server. >* Running primary DNS for a couple of domains. > > Migration of the web server and DNS is pretty straightforward. I was > wondering if there are any issues to consider when migrating the user > accounts? I am assuming that if I copy of the /etc/passwd, > /etc/shadow, and groups data then the accounts will operate nicely > under the new system. I would appreciate knowing if I am overlooking > anything. > > Thanks in advance, > > --chris My question would be why fix something that isn't broken? Since you're not using the unit as a workstation then you're loosing any real benefits of changing over to LM. Just my humble opinion and your mileage may vary. -- Joseph S Gardner Senior Designer / Technical Support Kirby Co., Cleveland, OH [EMAIL PROTECTED] The box said, "Requires Windows 3.x or better", so I got Linux. Registered Linux user #1696600 Keep in touch with http://mandrakeforum.com: Subscribe the "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" mailing list.
[expert] server migration RH -> MDK
I have an old server that is running RH and has been updated through 6.1. I am thinking about having its life start anew using Mandrake 7.1 or CS 1.0 and would appreciate any thoughts or experiences that others have had managing such a migration. The server is really performing three tasks: Running as a pop3 mail server. Running as a low-volume web server. Running primary DNS for a couple of domains. Migration of the web server and DNS is pretty straightforward. I was wondering if there are any issues to consider when migrating the user accounts? I am assuming that if I copy of the /etc/passwd, /etc/shadow, and groups data then the accounts will operate nicely under the new system. I would appreciate knowing if I am overlooking anything. Thanks in advance, --chris
Re: [expert] server question
on 8/17/00 7:33 AM, John Aldrich wrote: > On Wed, 16 Aug 2000, you wrote: >> Thus spake Tony McGee ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): >> [...] >>> Firewalling works by selectively blocking off access to certain Internet >>> Protocol ports. It's recommended to have a single dedicated machine as a >>> firewall and a second one as an internal mail/web server but if you're short >>> on >>> machines you can always just combine the two servers onto the one box and be >>> more careful about your firewall rules. For a full run down on how the >>> firewall >>> sofftware IPCHAINS works refer to it's HOW-TO document. >> >> For those of us without the time to spend and who can afford it, >> Linksys (I'm pretty sure) make a CABLE/DSL/Firewall/10-100 Ethernet >> switch all in one box which retails for $299 Cdn (so presumably around >> $200 US). >> > It's listed in warehouse.com's catalog for $179 US. > John > $10 dollars less at compUSA. I just installed one at a client's location and I was very impressed. from opening the box to getting 3 win95 computers sharing a cable modem took ~ 30 min. Gavin
Re: [expert] server question
On Wed, 16 Aug 2000, you wrote: > Thus spake Tony McGee ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > [...] > > Firewalling works by selectively blocking off access to certain Internet > > Protocol ports. It's recommended to have a single dedicated machine as a > > firewall and a second one as an internal mail/web server but if you're short on > > machines you can always just combine the two servers onto the one box and be > > more careful about your firewall rules. For a full run down on how the firewall > > sofftware IPCHAINS works refer to it's HOW-TO document. > > For those of us without the time to spend and who can afford it, > Linksys (I'm pretty sure) make a CABLE/DSL/Firewall/10-100 Ethernet > switch all in one box which retails for $299 Cdn (so presumably around > $200 US). > It's listed in warehouse.com's catalog for $179 US. John
Re: [expert] server question
On Wed, 16 Aug 2000, Deryk Barker wrote: > For those of us without the time to spend and who can afford it, > Linksys (I'm pretty sure) make a CABLE/DSL/Firewall/10-100 Ethernet > switch all in one box which retails for $299 Cdn (so presumably around > $200 US). > > I haven't got around to this yet but the reviews sound good. It will > be a DHCP client for your ISP and either a DHCP server for you local > net or you can use static IPs locally. You can configure IIRC > something like 8-10 ports to pass through the firewall, but this (also > IIRC) requires you to use static IPs internally. > > Configured via your web browser. > > OK it's wimping out in one sense and doubtless one could assemble a > linux box to do the same cheaper, but factor in your time to set it up > and... > Not really, I use it because the ipchains code was being freaky with some 2.2.x kernels, and resetting /proc/sys/net/ip_v4/ip_forward to 0 apparently for no reason, and randomly. Also, it helps when the power goes out, and your DSL/cable is plugged in a small UPS and your Linksys router is on the same. In experience it runs for more than 5 hours on a 300VA ups. -- Regards, Ellick Chan [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aug 16
Re: [expert] server question
Thus spake Tony McGee ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): [...] > Firewalling works by selectively blocking off access to certain Internet > Protocol ports. It's recommended to have a single dedicated machine as a > firewall and a second one as an internal mail/web server but if you're short on > machines you can always just combine the two servers onto the one box and be > more careful about your firewall rules. For a full run down on how the firewall > sofftware IPCHAINS works refer to it's HOW-TO document. For those of us without the time to spend and who can afford it, Linksys (I'm pretty sure) make a CABLE/DSL/Firewall/10-100 Ethernet switch all in one box which retails for $299 Cdn (so presumably around $200 US). I haven't got around to this yet but the reviews sound good. It will be a DHCP client for your ISP and either a DHCP server for you local net or you can use static IPs locally. You can configure IIRC something like 8-10 ports to pass through the firewall, but this (also IIRC) requires you to use static IPs internally. Configured via your web browser. OK it's wimping out in one sense and doubtless one could assemble a linux box to do the same cheaper, but factor in your time to set it up and... -- |Deryk Barker, Computer Science Dept. | Music does not have to be understood| |Camosun College, Victoria, BC, Canada| It has to be listened to. | |email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | |phone: +1 250 370 4452 | Hermann Scherchen. |
Re: [expert] server question
On Wed, 16 Aug 2000, Joseph S. Gardner pushed some tiny letters in this order: > > > > > > > For a small SOHO network it doesn't sound bad at all. What > > sort of trouble were you expecting? > > > > Linux." ? Any operating system is better than Win3.x! ;-) > > > > Tony > > Just concerned about the firewall setup I suppose... Not quite > certain how to set it up to allow email in, web surfing in, and > still protect my internal network. > > I REALLY don't understand how firewalling works and if I can > keep everything on the same network yet protected. Firewalling works by selectively blocking off access to certain Internet Protocol ports. It's recommended to have a single dedicated machine as a firewall and a second one as an internal mail/web server but if you're short on machines you can always just combine the two servers onto the one box and be more careful about your firewall rules. For a full run down on how the firewall sofftware IPCHAINS works refer to it's HOW-TO document. Tony
Re: [expert] server question
On Wed, 16 Aug 2000, Joseph S. Gardner wrote: > Is it practical / advisable to set up a single machine to act as > a firewall/email/web server or am I looking for MAJOR trouble. Traditionally, a firewall should have nothing but ssh running on it. If the e-mail/web services are compromised, the firewall can also be compromised. It is OK to run them all on the same box if you believe your web/e-mail server software to have no flaws in them that allow root access or anything like that. But many times that is not true, and it is possible for an attacker to break in through sendmail or something, and turn off the proctection of the firewall, compromising the entire network. I appreciate your concern for this. I recommend buying a Linksys (www.linksys.com) Broadband router anyhow, and remap the ports thru that. You can use that as a firewall, and then map the smtp (25) port and the http (80) port to the proper server machine. That way, at most, you compromise only 1 machine. > > I'm trying to run a SOHO with limited resources/computers but > still need all the goodies. > > Thanks, > -- Regards, Ellick Chan [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aug 16
Re: [expert] server question
> Just concerned about the firewall setup I suppose... Not quite > certain how to set it up to allow email in, web surfing in, and > still protect my internal network. > > I REALLY don't understand how firewalling works and if I can > keep everything on the same network yet protected. The way it works on my setup is (yay, I get to do ASCII art!): (internet) | | | < this side only allows web, anonymous FTP, ssh, and SMTP/POP/IMAP-over-SSL | firewall | | < this side allows everything; whatever --- services I want for the internal network | hub | --- | | | / | \ (internal network) The outside is firewalled using ipchains to disallow connections on all but certain ports. So, if I have, say, a samba server for filesharing installed on the firewall, I can get at it from my internal network, but it's unavailable from the internet. Even though samba is listening for connections, it will never see a connection on the outside network card because the firewall runs at the kernel-level. -- Ben Reed ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://defiance.dyndns.org/ Fight the InterNIC! http://www.opennic.unrated.net/
Re: [expert] server question
> Tony McGee wrote: > > On Wed, 16 Aug 2000, Joseph S. Gardner pushed some tiny letters in this order: > > > Is it practical / advisable to set up a single machine to act as > > > a firewall/email/web server or am I looking for MAJOR trouble. > > > > > > I'm trying to run a SOHO with limited resources/computers but > > > still need all the goodies. > > > > > > > For a small SOHO network it doesn't sound bad at all. What > > sort of trouble were you expecting? > > > > Linux." ? Any operating system is better than Win3.x! ;-) > > > > Tony > > Just concerned about the firewall setup I suppose... Not quite > certain how to set it up to allow email in, web surfing in, and > still protect my internal network. > > I REALLY don't understand how firewalling works and if I can > keep everything on the same network yet protected. > -- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] John Aldrich wrote... > My suggestion would be two computers -- one for firewall and one for > email/web server. 'Course depending on how much mail and how much web > traffic you have, it may get a bit overloaded. And you'll want a LOT > of ram in that thing! John's suggestion is good if you have more than one computer available. What I've done was to a LM7.1 server running Firewall (IP masq), web server, mail server, DNS, and SSH. The problem with my setup is that I have more open services that crackers can try to exploit and break in. I take security issues seriously and keep up to date with exploits, and update new packages. I have only one cable-modem DHCP IP address. I have two NICs on the firewall, and the second is locally connected to a 5-port switch... my other PCs are then connected to this switch. These PCs use private IP addresses 192.168.x.x For your setup, you only mention having *one* DSL IP address, which can be a problem since having your firewall forward requests to an internal network is potentially opening up a security hole. If you read the IP Masq HOW-TO, they talk about the Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) for setting things up. DSL line ---> Comp A (firewall)Comp B (web) Comp C (mail) || | | |- DMZ -- | Hub | | Comp D (LAN PC)Comp E (LAN PC) # using 192.168.x.x Keep in mind I am not totally clear on DMZ so others can correct me if I am incorrect in my details. Comp A would have 3 NICs, and you need 2 hubs. The DMZ hub could use private addresses 10.x.x.x and the LAN hub would use private addresses 192.168.x.x (or switch them around). This way requests to the web or mail server (or cracking attempts) can be restricted and avoid access (and thus protect) to your LAN PCs. You might also want to have your web server as a backup mail server to hold any mail (and forward later) in case your mail server goes down (or you're upgrading). Ideally, you would have 2-3 IP addresses from DSL service, and let people access the web server and mail server directly, and the firewall would be used to protect your LAN. There is also a way of doing a DMZ with real IP addresses (in HOW-TO), but I am not clear on how to do this (perhaps someone else can explain this. A friend of mine has 2 IP addresses and has Comp A as firewall, web server, backup mail server, primary DNS. Comp B is a mail server and secondary DNS. Comp A's firewall protects his LAN. This way he controls DNS for any of his registered domain names. Hope that helps to explain things (from the way understand it). Thanks... Dan.
Re: [expert] server question
On Wed, 16 Aug 2000, Joseph S. Gardner wrote: > > Just concerned about the firewall setup I suppose... Not quite > certain how to set it up to allow email in, web surfing in, and > still protect my internal network. I'm assumming the usual IPMasquerading/Firewall set up here. If the firewall box is your mail server/ web server you won't be letting that traffic onto your localnet except in reply to your requests. If you use something like pmfirewall, setting up the firewall is almost easy, and it has configuration options for masquerading. In terms of performance, you need to scale your machine to your needs, but the average home user masquerading a home network (say 4 machines and roughly 20-30 machine-hours of surfing a day) can be adequately handled by a 486/50 WITH a webserver serving a couple hundred hits a day. (personal experience talking here). One concern to have ... if you have the semi-static IP addresses typical of cable modems, you may loose mail if you get renumbered. I'd host my mail somewhere with a static IP address. The machine mentioned above has no problems handling the above load while acting as my MX backup for my company, and occasionally getting a few hundred messages in a few hours. (I run postfix on every mail server I manage). just a datapoint for you, -burk -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [expert] server question
"Joseph S. Gardner" wrote: > > Is it practical / advisable to set up a single machine to act as > a firewall/email/web server or am I looking for MAJOR trouble. > > I'm trying to run a SOHO with limited resources/computers but > still need all the goodies. > Practical - yes. Advisable - depends upon your situation. I think the general argument for putting the firewall on a machine by itself is that the more services you run on a machine the more potential there is that someone might be able to break it. We're running several machines that provide the resources you've mentioned, including the firewall, all on one machine - it's not hard to do. Then again, we don't have real great security concerns either. From what I've read, if you're a real stickler for detail you can tighten down the single machine pretty well but if you need the ultimate in security there's no substitute for a separate, very tight and restricted, firewall. Hope this helps. -- Mike Rambo Media & Electronics Specialist Lansing School District [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [expert] server question
Tony McGee wrote: > > On Wed, 16 Aug 2000, Joseph S. Gardner pushed some tiny letters in this order: > > Is it practical / advisable to set up a single machine to act as > > a firewall/email/web server or am I looking for MAJOR trouble. > > > > I'm trying to run a SOHO with limited resources/computers but > > still need all the goodies. > > > > For a small SOHO network it doesn't sound bad at all. What > sort of trouble were you expecting? > > Linux." ? Any operating system is better than Win3.x! ;-) > > Tony Just concerned about the firewall setup I suppose... Not quite certain how to set it up to allow email in, web surfing in, and still protect my internal network. I REALLY don't understand how firewalling works and if I can keep everything on the same network yet protected. -- Joseph S Gardner Senior Designer / Technical Support Kirby Co., Cleveland, OH [EMAIL PROTECTED] The box said, "Requires Windows 3.x or better", so I got Linux. Registered Linux user #1696600
Re: [expert] server question
On Wed, 16 Aug 2000, you wrote: > Is it practical / advisable to set up a single machine to act as > a firewall/email/web server or am I looking for MAJOR trouble. > > I'm trying to run a SOHO with limited resources/computers but > still need all the goodies. > My suggestion would be two computers -- one for firewall and one for email/web server. 'Course depending on how much mail and how much web traffic you have, it may get a bit overloaded. And you'll want a LOT of ram in that thing! John
Re: [expert] server question
On Wed, 16 Aug 2000, Joseph S. Gardner pushed some tiny letters in this order: > Is it practical / advisable to set up a single machine to act as > a firewall/email/web server or am I looking for MAJOR trouble. > > I'm trying to run a SOHO with limited resources/computers but > still need all the goodies. > For a small SOHO network it doesn't sound bad at all. What sort of trouble were you expecting? > The box said, > "Requires Windows 3.x or better", > so I got Linux. > Isn't it supposed to be "The box said 'Rrequires Windows 95 or better', so I got Linux." ? Any operating system is better than Win3.x! ;-) Tony
[expert] server question
Is it practical / advisable to set up a single machine to act as a firewall/email/web server or am I looking for MAJOR trouble. I'm trying to run a SOHO with limited resources/computers but still need all the goodies. Thanks, -- Joseph S Gardner Senior Designer / Technical Support Kirby Co., Cleveland, OH [EMAIL PROTECTED] The box said, "Requires Windows 3.x or better", so I got Linux. Registered Linux user #1696600
[expert] Server not coming up in KDE
I just installed a Mandrake 7.0-2 server at home. I chose the server option. It seems to be running fine except that the windows manager is not KDE. It looks more like a regular terminal then a GUI. Whatever the default Xwindows manager is for the server configuration, I don't like it. I want KDE! How do I tell Mandrake to default to KDE? Thanks.
