Re: Should a scanned image under Linux and Windows look similiar?
Thanks for your responses. I am a naive novice when it comes to scanners and images, ...which was my problem. When I turned off the RGB Defaults so that they could be adjusted, the Autoadjust feature worked very well. http://www.totalnetnh.net/~lamb/scan_linux.jpg http://www.totalnetnh.net/~lamb/scan_linux2.jpg Thanks, Larry ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Networking help
Hi all, I have a very bizarre problem going on here. I have a system on a different subnet. From my desktop, I ping the system and get no response. I ssh to another system on the same subnet, and can ping that system. Additionally, I can ssh to that system from the system on the same subnet. The route tables look fine, the interface is up, and can ping stuff off it's local subnet. If I run 'tcpdump -i eth1 icmp' on this system, then ping it from my desktop, I see the 'icmp echo request' coming in, but no 'icmp echo reply' going out. There is no ipchains/tables running, no tcpwrappers or anything that should be blocking icmp, or any other network activity. Eventually, if I leave the ping on my desktop running (i.e. don't Ctrl-C it) the remote system will answer. Pertinent systems specs: Monolithic kernel (no modules): Linux www 2.4.19 #1 Thu Aug 15 18:08:58 EDT 2002 i686 Pentium III (Coppermine) GenuineIntel GNU/Linux 3 NICs (only using eth0/1 currently): eth2 01:05.0 Ethernet controller: Intel Corp. 82557/8/9 [Ethernet Pro 100] (rev 08) eth1 02:04.0 Ethernet controller: Intel Corp. 82557/8/9 [Ethernet Pro 100] (rev 0d) eth0 02:05.0 Ethernet controller: Intel Corp. 82557/8/9 [Ethernet Pro 100] (rev 0d) Debian (woody) Anyone have any insights on this one? Interestingly, I have several systems which are all identical (Hardware and OS installation). Some have this problem, others don't. Thanks, -- Seeya, Paul -- It may look like I'm just sitting here doing nothing, but I'm really actively waiting for all my problems to go away. If you're not having fun, you're not doing it right! ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Boston Linux Conference December 3-4
On 22 Nov 2002, at 10:51am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: (Look, I had zero problems [that I could tell, but I didn't look closely] reading this in OpenOffice, but too me, it's just asinine, to send out Linux conference info in .doc format. Keep in mind that the people who perpetrate this kind of crime probably don't even know they are doing something wrong. They are usually marketing-types who don't understand the difference between Microsoft Word and a hard disk drive. Basically, they are ignorant, not careless. -- Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not | | necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or | | organization. All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Boston Linux Conference December 3-4
On Fri, 22 Nov 2002, at 10:03pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ... I then only sent it out in RTF and everybody would ask for it in DOC, I'm assuming the same will RTF is usually more portable. How about freaking ASCII text? :-) -- Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not | | necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or | | organization. All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Networking help
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi all, I have a very bizarre problem going on here. I have a system A on a different subnet. From my desktop, I ping the system B and get no response. I ssh to another system C on the same subnet, and can ping that system. Can you ping A from C? Does C have some kind of host route setup such that the traffic destined for A goes in one direction and the traffic for B goes in another? Are *all* of the routing tables OK? --kevin -- Kevin D. Clark / Cetacean Networks / Portsmouth, N.H. (USA) cetaceannetworks.com!kclark (GnuPG ID: B280F24E) alumni.unh.edu!kdc ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
OT: Bundled software (was: Boston Linux Conference December 3-4)
On Sun, 24 Nov 2002, at 12:29am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But I thought that most computers shipped with Acrobat. I know it's not a default application in Windows distributions, but doesn't it come as one of the packaged free programs that computer mftr's ship with their boxes to pad their feature list? Some do. There is no financial incentive to install it, so many (most?) don't bother. Adobe doesn't pay them anything, and the product is free, so the customers don't, either. MS Office and MS Works they can charge the customer for. -- Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not | | necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or | | organization. All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: PDF vs. .doc [was Re: Boston Linux Conference December 3-4 ]
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You can do this easily enough on UNIX with ghostscript package which included wrappers for ps2pdf, pdf2ps, etc.. Or, if you use TeX for your base formatting language (LaTeX, LyX, etc.) you can easily convert from [La]TeX to ps/pdf. So, with UNIX, you still don't need to by the distiller :) For those of us who have Windows running at work, these utilities are, I believe, available for Windows as well (alongside the ghostscript/ghostview programs). The Windows version of [La]TeX (MikTeX) has direct ps/pdf output as well. -Mike- = The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it -George Bernard Shaw __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Networking help
When I have seen these in the past, I have usually found them to be caused by an ARP issue. Try flushing the arp cache on the systems involved and then retry you experiment. If that doesn't work, look at all routers on the network to insure that proxy-arp is disabled. - Marc On Mon, 25 Nov 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi all, I have a very bizarre problem going on here. I have a system on a different subnet. From my desktop, I ping the system and get no response. I ssh to another system on the same subnet, and can ping that system. Additionally, I can ssh to that system from the system on the same subnet. The route tables look fine, the interface is up, and can ping stuff off it's local subnet. If I run 'tcpdump -i eth1 icmp' on this system, then ping it from my desktop, I see the 'icmp echo request' coming in, but no 'icmp echo reply' going out. There is no ipchains/tables running, no tcpwrappers or anything that should be blocking icmp, or any other network activity. Eventually, if I leave the ping on my desktop running (i.e. don't Ctrl-C it) the remote system will answer. Pertinent systems specs: Monolithic kernel (no modules): Linux www 2.4.19 #1 Thu Aug 15 18:08:58 EDT 2002 i686 Pentium III (Coppermine) GenuineIntel GNU/Linux 3 NICs (only using eth0/1 currently): eth2 01:05.0 Ethernet controller: Intel Corp. 82557/8/9 [Ethernet Pro 100] (rev 08) eth1 02:04.0 Ethernet controller: Intel Corp. 82557/8/9 [Ethernet Pro 100] (rev 0d) eth0 02:05.0 Ethernet controller: Intel Corp. 82557/8/9 [Ethernet Pro 100] (rev 0d) Debian (woody) Anyone have any insights on this one? Interestingly, I have several systems which are all identical (Hardware and OS installation). Some have this problem, others don't. Thanks, -- Seeya, Paul -- It may look like I'm just sitting here doing nothing, but I'm really actively waiting for all my problems to go away. If you're not having fun, you're not doing it right! ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Networking help
In a message dated: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 10:22:24 EST Marc Evans said: When I have seen these in the past, I have usually found them to be caused by an ARP issue. Try flushing the arp cache on the systems involved and then retry you experiment. The arp tables are usually empty when this occurs. If that doesn't work, look at all routers on the network to insure that proxy-arp is disabled. I wish that I could, but the routers are out of my control :( -- Seeya, Paul -- It may look like I'm just sitting here doing nothing, but I'm really actively waiting for all my problems to go away. If you're not having fun, you're not doing it right! ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Custom printing from web form data?
I have an interesting challenge to meet. I can think of one way to solve it but was wondering if others knew of already existing tools or techniques that might make it easier. What I'm trying to accomplish is to print certificates (to be snail-mailed) based on data collected from a form on a web site. I think it would be most efficient to print from a cron job using the data that had been previously collected and stored in a useful place, like a MySQL database. The tricky part is that the certificates should look fairly classy, which means they can't be just plain ASCII text. They should include graphic elements such as your typical certificate border with the fancy artwork. Of course multiple colors are required too. My thinking was to use a wee bit o' perl along with Latex and pre-made graphic elements to crank out a PostScript file for each certificate, then queue it up to the color printer. Any other ideas out there? -- Dan Coutu Managing Director Snowy Owl Internet Consulting, LLC http://www.snowy-owl.com/ Mobile: 603-759-3885 Fax: 603-673-6676 ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
RE: Custom printing from web form data?
-Original Message- From: Dan Coutu [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, November 25, 2002 8:57 AM To: Greater New Hampshire Linux Users Subject: Custom printing from web form data? What I'm trying to accomplish is to print certificates (to be snail-mailed) based on data collected from a form on a web site. I think it would be most efficient to print from a cron job using the data that had been previously collected and stored in a useful place, like a MySQL database. The tricky part is that the certificates should look fairly classy, which means they can't be just plain ASCII text. They should include graphic elements such as your typical certificate border with the fancy artwork. Of course multiple colors are required too. I'm not really knowledgeable about this, but PHP does offer PDF-formatting functions. Perhaps there's some way you could create a template PDF and just change the things that you need to change, and print that out... http://www.php.net/manual/en/ref.pdf.php Of course, I'm sure Perl has a module for this somewhere as well. Erik ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Boston Linux Conference December 3-4
I completely concur with this sentiment but I would point out that we live in an era when appearances are more important than substance to many people (present company excepted). -Alex P.S. If someone sent their resume in plain text, it would hit the trash can immediately independent of whether they had the highest qualifications or not. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Greater NH Linux User Group [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, November 25, 2002 8:31 AM Subject: Re: Boston Linux Conference December 3-4 On Fri, 22 Nov 2002, at 10:03pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ... I then only sent it out in RTF and everybody would ask for it in DOC, I'm assuming the same will RTF is usually more portable. How about freaking ASCII text? :-) -- Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not | | necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or | | organization. All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: PDF vs. .doc [was Re: Boston Linux Conference December 3-4 ]
In a message dated: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 09:19:14 EST Price, Erik said: I wish I had more time to learn how to use these tools, they sound much more versatile than what MacOS X offers. Still, it is very easy in MacOS X ... FWIU, the native display format for all documents is PDF so you when you choose to Print a file (from any application, not just some applications that support this), you can select to PDF and instead of going to the printer, the output gets saved as a PDF. Not as versatile, but easy This sounds similar to the 'Print to file' option honored by most apps under Windows/UNIX, the only real difference is that this option prints to a PS file, not a PDF. Is this Mac OS X by chance? I wonder if all they're doing is exactly the same as Windows/UNIX, printing to postscript, but then converting on the fly to PDF? After all, OS X is BSD based, it would be trivial to implement this kind of thing using ghostscript. If this is Mac OS X, you might want to get an xterm or shell window up and look for things like ps2pdf, pdf2ps, gs/ghostscript, etc. It wouldn't suprise me at all if they're already available. -- Seeya, Paul -- It may look like I'm just sitting here doing nothing, but I'm really actively waiting for all my problems to go away. If you're not having fun, you're not doing it right! ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Custom printing from web form data?
At 09:19 AM 11/25/2002 -0500, Dan Coutu wrote: I'd use PHP with PDFlib linked to it. Then I could create PDF's or for that matter the PS source and then have a cron job send all the certs to my printer. Wouldn't be that hard, we use PHP and perl now to create hard copy invoices in RTF. Works slick. ~kurth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, 25 Nov 2002, at 8:57am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My thinking was to use a wee bit o' perl along with Latex and pre-made graphic elements to crank out a PostScript file for each certificate, then queue it up to the color printer. It would likely be cheaper/faster to purchase pre-printed certificate stock (paper) and just print the name, etc., on a black-and-white printer. Yes, it would. But then all the certificates would have to look the same. I guess another requirement in my head that I didn't realize was that I need to be able to generate a wide variety of certificates with a single program. So they can't all look the same. -- Dan Coutu Managing Director Snowy Owl Internet Consulting, LLC http://www.snowy-owl.com/ Mobile: 603-759-3885 Fax: 603-673-6676 ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
RE: PDF vs. .doc [was Re: Boston Linux Conference December 3-4 ]
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, November 25, 2002 9:36 AM To: Price, Erik Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Greater New Hampshire LUG Subject: Re: PDF vs. .doc [was Re: Boston Linux Conference December 3-4 ] Is this Mac OS X by chance? That's what I meant by MacOS X. ;) I wonder if all they're doing is exactly the same as Windows/UNIX, printing to postscript, but then converting on the fly to PDF? After all, OS X is BSD based, it would be trivial to implement this kind of thing using ghostscript. I can't seem to find the answer to that. Once upon a time, I read somewhere the sentence MacOS X uses PDF as a native display format but never since have I been able to find out what that means (or even that same statement again). So whether all printable output is turned to a PDF before being displayed or whether it's done only when a user chooses to save as a PDF, I don't have the answer. Perhaps someone else on this list does. If this is Mac OS X, you might want to get an xterm or shell window up and look for things like ps2pdf, pdf2ps, gs/ghostscript, etc. It wouldn't suprise me at all if they're already available. I'll have to check it out when I get home, but even if they aren't, I do know that the Fink project has ported these applications to install easily via dselect on MacOS X (http://fink.sourceforge.net/). Erik ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Networking help
I shouldn't be an ARP issue -- if it were, then the other machine sending pings wouldn't work. Namely: - If it were an ARP issue on the primary pinging machine, then that would infer the something kaput with the default router's MAC -- since that's the only MAC that would matter in this scenario. One assumes Paul's tried pinging other hosts on other subnets (alas, I can't check the original e-mail). - If it were an ARP issue on the router, then the second pinging machine wouldn't be able to ping, either. - If it were an ARP issue on the destination machine, then, again, neither would be able to ping it. I do, however, have to wonder if you're routing correctly. Can you ping the remote subnet's router address? Is there any chance that the remote machine's got a static route with an incorrect subnet mask? Can you swap IP addresses with the machine that works and give that a go? $.02, -Ken In a message dated: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 10:22:24 EST Marc Evans said: When I have seen these in the past, I have usually found them to be caused by an ARP issue. Try flushing the arp cache on the systems involved and then retry you experiment. The arp tables are usually empty when this occurs. If that doesn't work, look at all routers on the network to insure that proxy-arp is disabled. I wish that I could, but the routers are out of my control :( -- Seeya, Paul -- It may look like I'm just sitting here doing nothing, but I'm really actively waiting for all my problems to go away. If you're not having fun, you're not doing it right! ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Networking help
In a message dated: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 16:10:41 EST Ken D'Ambrosio said: I shouldn't be an ARP issue -- if it were, then the other machine sending pings wouldn't work. Namely: Keep in mind. The pinging machine, systemA *cannot* ping systemC, but *can* ping systemB. B and C are on the same subnet, A is not. By 'cannot ping' I mean, I type 'ping systemC' and it just sits there. However, by ssh'ing to systemB, and from there to systemC, I run 'tcpdump -i eth1 icmp' and I can see that systemC *is* in fact receiving the icmp echo request packets. systemC just isn't replying to them! I do, however, have to wonder if you're routing correctly. Can you ping the remote subnet's router address? Yes, from all systems! Is there any chance that the remote machine's got a static route with an incorrect subnet mask? No. Can you swap IP addresses with the machine that works and give that a go? Maybe, but as I technically have several systemCs I know it's not limited to this one system. Here's tcpdump output from systemC, the system which I *cannot* ping from my system. There were 38 packets sent by my system, but it wasn't until the 31st packet that this system decided to respond. 15:23:38.618442 168.159.36.66 www-eth1: icmp: echo request (DF) 15:23:39.618222 168.159.36.66 www-eth1: icmp: echo request (DF) 15:23:40.618071 168.159.36.66 www-eth1: icmp: echo request (DF) 15:23:41.617916 168.159.36.66 www-eth1: icmp: echo request (DF) 15:23:42.617833 168.159.36.66 www-eth1: icmp: echo request (DF) 15:23:43.617638 168.159.36.66 www-eth1: icmp: echo request (DF) 15:23:44.617467 168.159.36.66 www-eth1: icmp: echo request (DF) 15:23:45.617314 168.159.36.66 www-eth1: icmp: echo request (DF) 15:23:46.617203 168.159.36.66 www-eth1: icmp: echo request (DF) 15:23:47.617007 168.159.36.66 www-eth1: icmp: echo request (DF) 15:23:48.616901 168.159.36.66 www-eth1: icmp: echo request (DF) 15:23:49.616736 168.159.36.66 www-eth1: icmp: echo request (DF) 15:23:50.616602 168.159.36.66 www-eth1: icmp: echo request (DF) 15:23:51.616469 168.159.36.66 www-eth1: icmp: echo request (DF) 15:23:52.616281 168.159.36.66 www-eth1: icmp: echo request (DF) 15:23:53.616185 168.159.36.66 www-eth1: icmp: echo request (DF) 15:23:54.615980 168.159.36.66 www-eth1: icmp: echo request (DF) 15:23:55.615844 168.159.36.66 www-eth1: icmp: echo request (DF) 15:23:56.615685 168.159.36.66 www-eth1: icmp: echo request (DF) 15:23:57.615534 168.159.36.66 www-eth1: icmp: echo request (DF) 15:23:58.615416 168.159.36.66 www-eth1: icmp: echo request (DF) 15:23:59.615264 168.159.36.66 www-eth1: icmp: echo request (DF) 15:24:00.615092 168.159.36.66 www-eth1: icmp: echo request (DF) 15:24:01.614943 168.159.36.66 www-eth1: icmp: echo request (DF) 15:24:02.614784 168.159.36.66 www-eth1: icmp: echo request (DF) 15:24:03.614696 168.159.36.66 www-eth1: icmp: echo request (DF) 15:24:04.614558 168.159.36.66 www-eth1: icmp: echo request (DF) 15:24:05.614353 168.159.36.66 www-eth1: icmp: echo request (DF) 15:24:06.614212 168.159.36.66 www-eth1: icmp: echo request (DF) 15:24:07.614047 168.159.36.66 www-eth1: icmp: echo request (DF) 15:24:08.613903 168.159.36.66 www-eth1: icmp: echo request (DF) 15:24:08.613945 www-eth1 168.159.36.66: icmp: echo reply 15:24:09.613768 168.159.36.66 www-eth1: icmp: echo request (DF) 15:24:09.613787 www-eth1 168.159.36.66: icmp: echo reply 15:24:10.613646 168.159.36.66 www-eth1: icmp: echo request (DF) 15:24:10.613658 www-eth1 168.159.36.66: icmp: echo reply 15:24:11.613466 168.159.36.66 www-eth1: icmp: echo request (DF) 15:24:11.613499 www-eth1 168.159.36.66: icmp: echo reply 15:24:12.613447 168.159.36.66 www-eth1: icmp: echo request (DF) 15:24:12.613472 www-eth1 168.159.36.66: icmp: echo reply -- Seeya, Paul -- It may look like I'm just sitting here doing nothing, but I'm really actively waiting for all my problems to go away. If you're not having fun, you're not doing it right! ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Networking help
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 16:10:41 EST Ken D'Ambrosio said: I shouldn't be an ARP issue -- if it were, then the other machine sending pings wouldn't work. Namely: Keep in mind. The pinging machine, systemA *cannot* ping systemC, but *can* ping systemB. B and C are on the same subnet, A is not. By 'cannot ping' I mean, I type 'ping systemC' and it just sits there. However, by ssh'ing to systemB, and from there to systemC, I run 'tcpdump -i eth1 icmp' and I can see that systemC *is* in fact receiving the icmp echo request packets. systemC just isn't replying to them! So we need to examine the possibility that System C doesn't know how to reach System A even though A does know how to reach C. I'd check netmasks on all the systems involved. If I am remembering right you're going from a Class A network (10.whatever) to a Class C network (192.168.whatever) here. Getting netmasks right is critically important in this kind of environment. I do, however, have to wonder if you're routing correctly. Can you ping the remote subnet's router address? I very much wonder if it isn't a router configuration problem. I note that the 192.168.*.* addresses are reserved for private networks that are often NAT'd behind a router that does NAT. It can be either really easy to setup this or, if setup wrong, really a pain. I'd first examine very closely the configuration of the router that bridges the two networks. If for some reason you find that there are TWO routers, or more likely a computer with two NICs bridging the two networks, then routing can get really funky as the rogue route sometimes handles traffic and sometimes doesn't. I've seen stuff like that cause me sleepless nights... :-( -- Dan Coutu Managing Director Snowy Owl Internet Consulting, LLC http://www.snowy-owl.com/ Mobile: 603-759-3885 Fax: 603-673-6676 ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Networking help
In a message dated: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 16:16:12 EST Dan Coutu said: So we need to examine the possibility that System C doesn't know how to reach System A even though A does know how to reach C. I'd check netmasks on all the systems involved. If I am remembering right you're going from a Class A network (10.whatever) to a Class C network (192.168.whatever) here. Getting netmasks right is critically important in this kind of environment. Though it is a Class A address, we're dealing with a CIDR block here, so it's really a Class C. Netmasks are all fine. From systemC I can ping SystemA (i.e. when I ping systemA from C, I also get a reply on C, which is not true when attempting to ping C from A). I very much wonder if it isn't a router configuration problem. Well, it *might* be, however, remember, systemB is also on the same subnet as systemC, and systemA has no problem getting to B. Just C. I note that the 192.168.*.* addresses are reserved for private networks that are often NAT'd behind a router that does NAT. It can be either really easy to setup this or, if setup wrong, really a pain. Not a problem. NAT is not involved. And 10.X.Y.Z addresses are just as private as 192.168.*.* addresses. This all on an internal corporate network. I'd first examine very closely the configuration of the router that bridges the two networks. If for some reason you find that there are TWO routers, or more likely a computer with two NICs bridging the two networks, then routing can get really funky as the rogue route sometimes handles traffic and sometimes doesn't. I've seen stuff like that cause me sleepless nights... :-( Yeah, I'd like to closely examine the routers involved as well, however, I have no access to them :( I do have a call into the networking group, but they have yet to respond (there's a suprise!). Thanks, -- Seeya, Paul -- It may look like I'm just sitting here doing nothing, but I'm really actively waiting for all my problems to go away. If you're not having fun, you're not doing it right! ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Boston Linux Conference December 3-4
On Mon, 25 Nov 2002, at 9:27am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I completely concur with this sentiment but I would point out that we live in an era when appearances are more important than substance to many people (present company excepted). True. Next question: Do I want to work for one of them? :-) If someone sent their resume in plain text, it would hit the trash can immediately independent of whether they had the highest qualifications or not. I send MIME-encoded, dual-format text and HTML on the rare occasions when I need to send formatted text via email to a recipient I do not know. Almost any software automatically does the Right Thing when presented with such, regardless of platform or installed software. (Incidentally, I have see your above statement given almost word for word, but with MS Word in place of plain text. The universe is not uniform.) -- Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not | | necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or | | organization. All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Networking help
On Mon, 25 Nov 2002, at 3:29pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: However, by ssh'ing to systemB, and from there to systemC, I run 'tcpdump -i eth1 icmp' and I can see that systemC *is* in fact receiving the icmp echo request packets. systemC just isn't replying to them! That is significant. There are two possibilities. One: The system is receiving those packets, but thinks it should not reply to them. Two: The system is replying, but you are not seeing the replies. You assert systemC is not replying to them, based on tcpdump. That's normally a pretty good indication, but you've already demonstrated this is not a normal problem. Just to satisfy paranoia, use another system to sniff the Ethernet that system C is plugged into. If system C is plugged into a switch, add a repeater for system C and the sniffer. Is the system multi-homed? If so, is there any chance it is sending the packets out the wrong interface? You said these systems are running Linux, right? Create firewall rules that log ICMP packets but don't specify a jump target. That will show you what the kernel router *thinks* is going on. This has the added benefit of not watching a particular interface. Assuming you find no evidence of replies going into a blackhole, that means the system must not be replying for some reason. Why? If system C thinks the packet is for a different host, the packet will be dropped. Since it sometimes *does* reply, I cannot see how this could be the cause. Firewall rules could do this, but you've already checked that. What about ICMP rate limiting? Does the kernel do anything like that outside of IPTABLES? I don't think it does, but maybe? If the packet's checksum is bad, the packet will be silently dropped. If it has a header somewhere that is somehow bad, it may be silently dropped. Is something somewhere (router) corrupting the packets? Try dumping the full packet structure. Ethereal (or tethereal) is great for this. Look for any reason the packet might be considered invalid. If the system thinks the packet is part of an incomplete fragment, it will hold it in memory for reassembly. According to your tcpdump output, the DF (Don't Fragment) bit is set... is a router somewhere ignoring that bit? -- Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not | | necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or | | organization. All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
