Re: VoIP software
On Wed, 2004-11-17 at 19:17 -0500, Bill McGonigle wrote: On Nov 17, 2004, at 12:11, Kenneth E. Lussier wrote: You need an FXO card of some sort to plug your phone line into. You can buy a single port FXO card from Digium (Wildcard X100P) for $100... Then, you need IP phones. You can get Grandstream Budgetones for about $65, or you can spend $600 on a Cisco :-) Is there a card you can use to plug your existing phone 'network' into? At this point I just want Asterisk for doing voicemail and auto-attendant, so no need for VOIP phones, per se, just two POTS lines in the house. Yes, you need an FXS card. You can get the TDM400P from Digium (http://www.digium.com/index.php?menu=wildcard_tdm400p2). It is a 4-port card that can have either FXS or FXO modules on it. I know several people that have the tdm400p with 3 FXS modules and one FXO module. That allows them to connect the card to the PSTN as well as their existing phones. Another idea that I have seen used in a few places is that rather than use FXS modules, you can get an IAD that turns your regular analog phone into an IP phone. You can get a Cisco ATA-186 for about $120 (or other various brands for a lot less. Search froogle for IAD). Rather then plugging just one phone into it, you can plug in the base system of an expandable phone system (i.e. one base, 5 handsets). Since all of the handsets communicate back to the base, the base is the only one that needs to be IP. HTH, Kenny signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Monthly Meeting - Nov. 4th
Does anyone know if the meeting notes for this meeting will be posted? I'm interested in setting something like that up. Thanks, Paul On Thu, 2004-11-04 at 14:19 -0500, Bruce Dawson wrote: http://wiki.gnhlug.org/twiki2/bin/view/Www/PastEvents ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Monthly Meeting - Nov. 4th
Look again. I added links to the notes from the IRC talk to that topic last night. --Bruce On Thu, 2004-11-18 at 11:31, Whelan, Paul wrote: Does anyone know if the meeting notes for this meeting will be posted? I'm interested in setting something like that up. Thanks, Paul signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Monthly Meeting - Nov. 4th
On Nov 18, 2004, at 11:31 AM, Whelan, Paul wrote: Does anyone know if the meeting notes for this meeting will be posted? I'm interested in setting something like that up. http://wiki.gnhlug.org/twiki2/bin/view/Www/IRC Ted Roche Ted Roche Associates, LLC http://www.tedroche.com ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Monthly Meeting - Nov. 4th
On Thu, Nov 18, 2004 at 01:56:04PM -0500, Ted Roche wrote: On Nov 18, 2004, at 11:31 AM, Whelan, Paul wrote: Does anyone know if the meeting notes for this meeting will be posted? I'm interested in setting something like that up. http://wiki.gnhlug.org/twiki2/bin/view/Www/IRC Everyone has assumed that he meant the IRC talk, but I think (after discussing on IRC) that it was probably referring to the PDF creation/generation talk. I can't seem to find information on the wiki on this either, and I thought someone mentioned posting it. (Feel free to call me wrong, but it just seemed more fitting to the question.) -- Christopher Schmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] pgplZpDfmZJ2s.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Monthly Meeting - Nov. 4th
On Nov 18, 2004, at 14:15, Christopher Schmidt wrote: Everyone has assumed that he meant the IRC talk, but I think (after discussing on IRC) that it was probably referring to the PDF creation/generation talk. I can't seem to find information on the wiki on this either, and I thought someone mentioned posting it. If you mean the talk at DLSLUG on Server-side PDF you can get it here: http://www.dlslug.org/past_meetings.html there's a link to the DLSLUG page in the Wiki too. -Bill Bill McGonigle, Owner Work: 603.448.4440 BFC Computing, LLC Home: 603.448.1668 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cell: 603.252.2606 http://www.bfccomputing.com/Text: [EMAIL PROTECTED] AIM: wpmcgonigleSkype: bill_mcgonigle ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Sendmail question. (Sometimes I get lucky)
On Wed, 17 Nov 2004, at 2:51pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So on the one hand I want to reject the message because of the To but it gets accepted by the Received: from mx2.zoneedit.com header. You don't want to SMTP reject spam relayed through a secondary MX. Google for backscatter to find out why. Your best bet is to use a procmail rule, or some other kind of MDA level filtering, to silently discard any spam that makes it through MTA filters. -- Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do | | not represent the views or policy of any other person 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: Since I'm feeling lucky, how about another sendmail question?
On Wed, 17 Nov 2004, at 4:55pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I want to reject all incoming email which is addressed to my domain and has a completly numeric address e.g. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Anyone have a recipe? :0: * [EMAIL PROTECTED] /dev/null -- Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do | | not represent the views or policy of any other person 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: Since I'm feeling lucky, how about another sendmail question?
On Thursday, Nov 18th 2004 at 15:45 -0500, quoth Benjamin Scott: =On Wed, 17 Nov 2004, at 4:55pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: = I want to reject all incoming email which is addressed to my domain and = has a completly numeric address = = e.g. [EMAIL PROTECTED] = = Anyone have a recipe? = =:0: =* [EMAIL PROTECTED] =/dev/null Thanks, but no. What I want is to reject in sendmail. I don't even use procmail for spam processing since I'm using spamass-milter. The goal is to reject all spam before reception completes. -- Time flies like the wind. Fruit flies like a banana. Stranger things have .0. happened but none stranger than this. Does your driver's license say Organ ..0 Donor?Black holes are where God divided by zero. Listen to me! We are all- 000 individuals! What if this weren't a hypothetical question? steveo at syslang.net ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Since I'm feeling lucky, how about another sendmail question?
On Nov 18, 2004, at 16:31, Steven W. Orr wrote: Thanks, but no. What I want is to reject in sendmail. I don't even use procmail for spam processing since I'm using spamass-milter. score FROM_STARTS_WITH_NUMS +5 ? If you really need 124ABC@ as valid, perhaps a rule like: header FROM_IS_NUMSFrom =~ /^\d+\@/ describe FROM_IS_NUMS From: from is nums (untested) -Bill Bill McGonigle, Owner Work: 603.448.4440 BFC Computing, LLC Home: 603.448.1668 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cell: 603.252.2606 http://www.bfccomputing.com/Text: [EMAIL PROTECTED] AIM: wpmcgonigleSkype: bill_mcgonigle ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Since I'm feeling lucky, how about another sendmail question?
On Thu, 18 Nov 2004, at 4:23pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If your using the milter, why not configure the secondary to use the milter as well? That's the way to do it, for sure, but the OP said he was using some third party secondary MX service, which I expect won't give him the control he wants. -- Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do | | not represent the views or policy of any other person 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: Since I'm feeling lucky, how about another sendmail question?
On Thu, 18 Nov 2004, at 4:31pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks, but no. What I want is to reject in sendmail. I don't even use procmail for spam processing since I'm using spamass-milter. The goal is to reject all spam before reception completes. Ahhh. The dream of mail admins everywhere. Someone else already posted a SpamAssassin rule. As I said before, just make sure you don't do SMTP rejects on anything coming from your secondary MX. Silently discard such spam. Anything else, and you backscatter the whole world. That tends to double the spam problem. It can also get *you* marked as a spammer, since now your system is emitting spam-like messages. Spam backscatter is as bad as spam. Worse, in some ways. Don't make things worse. Ben, who has been the victim of joe-jobs before. -- Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do | | not represent the views or policy of any other person 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: Why Intuit should have an Open Source version of QuickBooks...
On Wed, 10 Nov 2004, at 7:26pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ... making QuickBooks compatible with Open Source platforms would not only open up new markets but make them less dependent on Microsoft behaving themselves ... Only problem with that is that QuickBooks is *extremely* married to Windows. It uses Microsoft's HTML engine for most of it's internal display functions. It makes heavy use of ActiveX. And it's really badly done, so much so that if you set the Internet Explorer Security settings to anything less then wide open, it stops working. It's a horrible program. Oddly QuickBooks will happily work with a Linux fileserver running Samba but Intuit won't support users in that configuration. Intuit won't support QuickBooks, period. Intuit makes Microsoft look good. At least when you call MS Product Support Services and pay the $245 it takes to speak to someone with clue, you get someone who is willing and able to solve your problem. With Intuit, you buy a buggy product, pay extra for support, and then they just tell you to buy a more expensive edition of QuickBooks. You do that, encounter the same damn bugs, call back, and they can't help you. Gah, I hate that program. -- Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do | | not represent the views or policy of any other person 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: Why Intuit should have an Open Source version of QuickBooks...
On Wed, 10 Nov 2004, at 9:16pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Samba doesn't work out-of-the-box with Quickbooks when multiple users have the database open. You have to do something like, IIRC,: [share] oplocks = No level2 oplocks = No strict locking = Yes Intuit strongly recommends (read: do this, or QuickBooks will eat your company data file on a daily basis, as opposed to randomly) that you do the same (disable oplocks) on Windows servers, BTW. Except you have to edit some obscure registry entry to do it. So, people with Linux servers lie and say they've got an NT4 fileserver if it comes up. I am shocked -- *shocked* -- that you would suggest that I -- I mean, people -- would do such a thing. ;-) -- Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do | | not represent the views or policy of any other person 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: Why Intuit should have an Open Source version of QuickBooks...
On Wed, 10 Nov 2004, at 9:50pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Even then, I was able to run QuickBooks multiuser without any problems on a Samba 2.0.x platform. How often did you run a consistency check on your company file? One of the really SARCASMwonderful/SARCASM things about QuickBooks is that when it starts eating data, it doesn't always give you an error message. It just produces the wrong answers. As long as you keep oplocks turned off, we find QuickBooks works as well with Samba as with Windows. Not that that's saying much. Turn them on, and you're virtually guaranteed to have trouble. QuickBooks isn't the only program which reacts badly to oplocks. Microsoft Access tends to have the same problem (with multi-user access). I image other things, too. I always configure a separate share for anything that even smells like a database, and disable oplocks (and enable strict sync and strict locking) on that share. -- Ben Scott | Net Technologies, Inc. | 978-462-8795 Systems Engineer | Salisbury, MA, USA | 866-905-3049 [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.ntisys.com | Fax: 978-499-7839 ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: Why Intuit should have an Open Source version of QuickBooks...
On Wed, 10 Nov 2004, at 9:50pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In any event, an open source equivalent to QuickBooks would be very useful to us. Hell, I'd pay good money for a proprietary, closed, commercial product that provided a QuickBooks like interface, but was Linux *and* Windows friendly, and didn't eat data for breakfast. One thing I'm very interested in is Quasar Accounting from Linux Canada. True client-server based database, server runs on Linux or Windows, native Windows and Linux (X11) clients, near-identical GUI on both, additional POS module. The GUI was definitely not as nice as QuickBooks, but it seemed decent enough. Very reasonable pricing model. It's even free for a single user with basic features only. Problem is, I know nothing about accounting, so I can't evaluate it properly. :-( http://www.linuxcanada.com/ Other's opinions very warmly welcomed. -- Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do | | not represent the views or policy of any other person 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
Bluetooth and Linux
At the meeting last night, I discovered that I am one of relatively few people who have had the oppourtunity to develop and play with communication between a bluetooth mobile device and a Linux machine. (at least in the subset of GNH which was at that meeting.) In case there are others of you out there who may have an interest in such things, I'm going to toss a few links out there. These are projects I either used or ran into while I was playing with my Nokia 3650, most of which I was doing about a year ago. The official Bluetooth stack is bluez, and is an option to be compiled into many newer kernels. Its homepage is available at http://www.bluez.org/ . This page didn't exist when I was looking into Bluetooth - much of my researching was pulling myself up by the bootstraps - reading a lot of documentation to get as far as I did. There are many Howtos as to how to set things up available at http://www.holtmann.org/linux/bluetooth/ (a page which only had a dozen or so links when I was last playing with it.) Once you've got Bluetooth set up, there are some nifty projects you can use: http://bemused.sourceforge.net/ A project which allows you to control your mp3 player via a simple interface on a Series 60 phone. This project uses the phone as a client, which can issue commands like skip forward, skip backwards, pause, etc. to a server which runs primarily on Windows, but also under Linux. I used this to control xmms or xine, both of which have simple command line ways of skipping to next track, etc. Currently, the interface is pretty heavily tied to a track-type program, because the commands are attached to the GUI in the phone. If anyone knows Sybmian, I expect that it would be possible to change this so that buttons on the phone could have more of an effect. http://openobex.sourceforge.net/ This is how I transferred files to the phone. Once you set up a serial connection to the phone, you can transfer files in this way. This may be superceded by the next project: http://usefulinc.com/software/gnome-bluetooth/ Edd Dumbill's gnome-bluetooth packages are a way of integrating Bluetooth into the desktop. It mirrors a lot of funtionality of the phone directly to the computer: notification of incoming calls, files, SMS, and the like, as well as serving as a bluetooth file server and so on. This looks like a really nifty piece of software, although I don't have hardware to play with it on. I've seen some other things that Edd has done in the past, and they've always been impressive. (One project looked at devices around you in Bluetooth land, and told you if it could associate them to a person that you knew as described in RDF: however, the project never went anywhere other than a demo, afaik: looks like it was last touched back in February. Blog post is at http://usefulinc.com/edd/blog/contents/2004/02/01-bluefoaf/read .) That's just a roundup of some of the things I've come across when working in Linux+Bluetooth world. If any of you have any interest in playing with Bluetooth, I'd be happy to try it out - I have a powerbook with bluetooth, and somewhere in this house I have a bluetooth USB adapter that I need to find ;) In addition, I have a Nokia 3650, which tends to be a pretty popular model for applications (Although it doesn't support MIDP 2.0, which is needed for some Java stuff.) I also use the Bluetooth on the Mac religiously: BluePhoneManager and Salling Clicker, combined with Apple's iSync are all incredible apps, and do everything I could think of doing. Almost makes me wish there was a scripting interface on Linux similar to apple script - where you can control just about anything pretty simply. This post is getting long and rambly. So I'll stop. -- Christopher Schmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] pgpjslIIgiqFZ.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why Intuit should have an Open Source version of QuickBooks...
Benjamin Scott wrote: On Wed, 10 Nov 2004, at 9:50pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Even then, I was able to run QuickBooks multiuser without any problems on a Samba 2.0.x platform. How often did you run a consistency check on your company file? One of the really SARCASMwonderful/SARCASM things about QuickBooks is that when it starts eating data, it doesn't always give you an error message. It just produces the wrong answers. Every month while we were beta testing for QuickBooks. It said we needed to rebuild a few times, but never saw any difference before or after a rebuild. Now - once a year. Again, we have never lost any data, nor seen any inconsistent numbers, either for us or the half-dozen or so clients (and us) who use it, since 1996. YMMV. As long as you keep oplocks turned off, we find QuickBooks works as well with Samba as with Windows. Not that that's saying much. Turn them on, and you're virtually guaranteed to have trouble. I'd heard this a number of times. For us, it has not been a problem. I did try it both with without oplocks and saw a significant performance hit with oplocks off and auditting was on, but otherwise no difference in behavior. QuickBooks isn't the only program which reacts badly to oplocks. Microsoft Access tends to have the same problem (with multi-user access). I image other things, too. I always configure a separate share for anything that even smells like a database, and disable oplocks (and enable strict sync and strict locking) on that share. I've had major problems with oplocks with several applications, Access or programs built from Access, being the worst. Some problems with DOS FoxPro applications too. So, I do recommend the oplock-less share approach for offending applications. I have also done with same with the Windows Server shares, but, if I recollect right, you can not disable oplocks on a share-by-share basis with Windows, but you can with Samba - which is one reason why I consider Samba a superior Windows file server. -- Dan Jenkins ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Rastech Inc., Bedford, NH, USA --- 1-603-206-9951 *** Technical Support for over a Quarter Century ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
