Re: [leaf-user] wisp with serial_cs and yenta_socket?
Thanks Does the i82365 module also replaces the serial_cs.o (which we need for a modem) or is there another according module in this configuration? Vladimir I. wrote: Try the latest test WISP-Dist release from http://www.hazard.maks.net/wisp-dist/downloads. Also, WISP-Dist does not use in-kernel PCMCIA drivers, so there is no yenta_socket conf, it uses i82365 and other modules instead. I found them to be more flexible than yenta_socket which doesn't work on some of the hardware. Nicolas Cedraschi wrote: hi everybody, for our wisp setup (2.4.18) we would need the above mentionned modules to access a modem via minicom. serial_cs we found in the pcmcia.lrp package. When we tried to load, it gave us the following error: serial_cs: Card Services release does not match! Where could we get the appropriate version of serial_cs to use minicom to configure the modem or how can we get it runnin' otherwise? Is the integration of new modules into wisp straight forward, as in bering? Furthermore, we are still looking for the appropriate yenta_socket module for wisp. Does anybody know, where we can get these? Thanx in advance Nicolas Daniel --- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! http://www.vasoftware.com leaf-user mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user SR FAQ: http://leaf-project.org/pub/doc/docmanager/docid_1891.html --- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! http://www.vasoftware.com leaf-user mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user SR FAQ: http://leaf-project.org/pub/doc/docmanager/docid_1891.html
Re: [leaf-user] Mail Questions
Gary St wrote: Hello Everyone. I'm using Eigerstien 2.2.16 and when i try to send mail with command: mail -s test [EMAIL PROTECTED] somefile I get back: Error: Unknown response. RSET 0: Aborting due to connection error Killing child processes: 2736 2739 with nothing in the logs. Any ideas why this is happening. There are one of two problems. The first is that you need an updated POSIXnessmail file. Once that script is in place, then you need to have the settings configured correctly. Otherwise, I recall that you will receive the same error type. Look on this page under grep in the table for instructions. http://lrp.steinkuehler.net/files/packages/Utilities POSIXness file is here. http://lrp.steinkuehler.net/files/packages/Utilities/grep I just retired a Eigerstien system after 18 months of uptime in December 2002. The floppy died on reboot after a power outage. I'd highly recommend upgrading to Dachstein floppy or CD. As the utilities page points out the updated POSIXness script is already included in the newer releases. Greg Morgan --- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! http://www.vasoftware.com leaf-user mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user SR FAQ: http://leaf-project.org/pub/doc/docmanager/docid_1891.html
Re: [leaf-user] wisp with serial_cs and yenta_socket?
No, serial_cs is serial_cs. :) Grab the modules package from http://www.hazard.maks.net/wisp-dist/downloads and take whatever modules you need. Nicolas Cedraschi wrote: Thanks Does the i82365 module also replaces the serial_cs.o (which we need for a modem) or is there another according module in this configuration? Vladimir I. wrote: Try the latest test WISP-Dist release from http://www.hazard.maks.net/wisp-dist/downloads. Also, WISP-Dist does not use in-kernel PCMCIA drivers, so there is no yenta_socket conf, it uses i82365 and other modules instead. I found them to be more flexible than yenta_socket which doesn't work on some of the hardware. Nicolas Cedraschi wrote: hi everybody, for our wisp setup (2.4.18) we would need the above mentionned modules to access a modem via minicom. serial_cs we found in the pcmcia.lrp package. When we tried to load, it gave us the following error: serial_cs: Card Services release does not match! Where could we get the appropriate version of serial_cs to use minicom to configure the modem or how can we get it runnin' otherwise? Is the integration of new modules into wisp straight forward, as in bering? Furthermore, we are still looking for the appropriate yenta_socket module for wisp. Does anybody know, where we can get these? Thanx in advance Nicolas Daniel --- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! http://www.vasoftware.com leaf-user mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user SR FAQ: http://leaf-project.org/pub/doc/docmanager/docid_1891.html --- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! http://www.vasoftware.com leaf-user mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user SR FAQ: http://leaf-project.org/pub/doc/docmanager/docid_1891.html -- Best Regards, Vladimir Systems Engineer (RHCE) --- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! http://www.vasoftware.com leaf-user mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user SR FAQ: http://leaf-project.org/pub/doc/docmanager/docid_1891.html
[leaf-user] Re: Do not see DoC device with WISP build 2469
I added entries for node creation in a wrong place. Should be ok now. I have put a new test image in http://www.hazard.maks.net/wisp-dist/downloads , please let me know if it helps. David Ondzes wrote: The bootup correctly identifies my 72 meg DoC but I can't seem to mount it. ls -l /dev/n* /dev/nfsd /dev/null /dev/nvram I searched the archives but only could find problems with Bering and DoC back in 05/02. Is anyone using DoC with Wisp ? -- Best Regards, Vladimir Systems Engineer (RHCE) --- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! http://www.vasoftware.com leaf-user mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user SR FAQ: http://leaf-project.org/pub/doc/docmanager/docid_1891.html
[leaf-user] Tulip drivers on Bering 1.0 Stable
Hi, I have been using EigerStein 2-Beta for about three years and have been very satisfied with it. I recently changed ISP's and need to use PPPoE and decided to upgrade to Bering 1.0 Stable. I am using a 100 MHZ Pentium with 40 meg of Ram. I use two Netgear FA311 network cards. I used the tulip driver with Eiger and had no problems, but when I install the driver with Bering (the driver came from the Bering 1.0 stable modules download) I get unresolved symbol messages. I was wondering if the drivers need to be recompiled or if there is something new that I have to do to get the drivers to load. Thanks for the help. I really appreciate all the time that has been put into Leaf. Wayne Fool * This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. www.hubbell.com - Hubbell Incorporated * --- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! http://www.vasoftware.com leaf-user mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user SR FAQ: http://leaf-project.org/pub/doc/docmanager/docid_1891.html
Re: [leaf-user] Tulip drivers on Bering 1.0 Stable
On Thu, 09 Jan 2003 08:18:12 EST Wayne Fool wrote: Hi, I have been using EigerStein 2-Beta for about three years and have been very satisfied with it. I recently changed ISP's and need to use PPPoE and decided to upgrade to Bering 1.0 Stable. I am using a 100 MHZ Pentium with 40 meg of Ram. I use two Netgear FA311 network cards. I used the tulip driver with Eiger and had no problems, but when I install the driver with Bering (the driver came from the Bering 1.0 stable modules download) I get unresolved symbol messages. I was wondering if the drivers need to be recompiled or if there is something new that I have to do to get the drivers to load. There are two versions of tulip.o in the modules directory for Bering 1.0-stable: kernel/drivers/net/tulip/tulip.o net/tulip.o I think one of them *may* depend on pci-scan.o, although that is from memory and I could easily be wrong. I remember having trouble with one of them when I tried them out. I believe the other worked flawlessly and did not have dependencies on other modules. You might give both a try if you haven't already. --Brad --- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! http://www.vasoftware.com leaf-user mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user SR FAQ: http://leaf-project.org/pub/doc/docmanager/docid_1891.html
RE: [leaf-user] Bering package.local file for partial backups
If update some of the Bering packages with the .local files (mostly stealing from Dachstein) is there a home for them on leaf.sourceforge.net? I'd hate to go through the hassle and no one else benefits. Thanks. - Todd -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of M Lu Sent: Friday, January 03, 2003 4:09 PM To: Todd Pearsall; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [leaf-user] Bering package.local file for partial backups I do not think you are using wrong file. I also notice that some packages do not have .local file. But if needed, you can create the .local file yourself and the partial packup should be fine. - Original Message - From: Todd Pearsall [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, January 03, 2003 7:20 AM Subject: [leaf-user] Bering package.local file for partial backups The packages that I pulled down with Bering don't have the PACKAGE.local file used for partial backups so the partials only pull the default files. Am I using the wrong file or am I missing something? Thanks, Todd --- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf -- -- leaf-user mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user SR FAQ: http://leaf-project.org/pub/doc/docmanager/docid_1891.html --- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf -- -- leaf-user mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user SR FAQ: http://leaf-project.org/pub/doc/docmanager/docid_1891.html --- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! http://www.vasoftware.com leaf-user mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user SR FAQ: http://leaf-project.org/pub/doc/docmanager/docid_1891.html
Re: Fw: [leaf-user] Dachstein CD with Realtek 8139 NICs
Yes, here is what I have in my /etc/modules ... ! mount iso9660 /dev/hda # Change the default directory, like this: ! dir /lib/modules/net ###Some ethernet cards #3c509 irq=5 pci-scan rtl8139 .. - Original Message - From: Chris Low [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 08, 2003 4:43 PM Subject: Re: Fw: [leaf-user] Dachstein CD with Realtek 8139 NICs Just checking, so all I have to do then is uncomment the pci-scan line and add another line that says rtl8139 and it should work? Thanks, Chris At 03:49 PM 1/8/2003, you wrote: You should not have to compile anything. The module is already on the CD. Just edit the file /etc/modules to declare your cards. I think it is something rtl8139 and maybe it also need pci-scan module too. I do not have access to my router here but if you need details, let me know and I will send you the sample. Hope that helps. --- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! http://www.vasoftware.com leaf-user mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user SR FAQ: http://leaf-project.org/pub/doc/docmanager/docid_1891.html --- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! http://www.vasoftware.com leaf-user mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user SR FAQ: http://leaf-project.org/pub/doc/docmanager/docid_1891.html
Re: [leaf-user] Does this indicate I've been hacked?
On Thursday 09 January 2003 12:30 am, Tony wrote: Hi Lynn, When you say you, you mean the original poster...right? I was responding to him. Yep, however Sandro uses Portsentry and indicates that this is normal operation of PortSentryso it is not a hack, but rather someone likely trying to hack a system and blocked. Anyway, I think your approach would be a better one, backup the whole disk to a blank diskette, reboot the original disk and then you have a snapshot and can compare while returning to a safe condition. That was my first thought was to get back to safe ASAP and save the logs for ip addys and such. I like your approach better. Just as quick, and more complete. Yep, intrusion detection normally can't be done on the compromised box since the utilities that you use to detect it are replaced with ones that won't give it away. A popular way of hiding stuff is use of a . directory so that it is hard to find even with a non-compromised box. A better idea is to send logs to a remote printer, but this is overkill for most people. -- ~Lynn Avants Linux Embedded Appliance Firewall developer http://leaf.sourceforge.net --- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! http://www.vasoftware.com leaf-user mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user SR FAQ: http://leaf-project.org/pub/doc/docmanager/docid_1891.html
RE: [leaf-user] Bering package.local file for partial backups
On Thu, 2003-01-09 at 06:40, Todd Pearsall wrote: If update some of the Bering packages with the .local files (mostly stealing from Dachstein) is there a home for them on leaf.sourceforge.net? I'd hate to go through the hassle and no one else benefits. Todd, Of course there is space for new content. You can follow the instructions on our Contributions page, or contact me off-list for other options. Contributions http://leaf-project.org/mod.php?mod=userpagemenu=16page_id=22 -- Mike Noyes mhnoyes @ users.sourceforge.net http://sourceforge.net/users/mhnoyes/ http://leaf-project.org/ http://sitedocs.sf.net/ http://ffl.sf.net/ --- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! http://www.vasoftware.com leaf-user mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user SR FAQ: http://leaf-project.org/pub/doc/docmanager/docid_1891.html
RE: [leaf-user] Bering package.local file for partial backups
Contributions section...what an odd place for it ;) Thanks. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Mike Noyes Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2003 10:52 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [leaf-user] Bering package.local file for partial backups On Thu, 2003-01-09 at 06:40, Todd Pearsall wrote: If update some of the Bering packages with the .local files (mostly stealing from Dachstein) is there a home for them on leaf.sourceforge.net? I'd hate to go through the hassle and no one else benefits. Todd, Of course there is space for new content. You can follow the instructions on our Contributions page, or contact me off-list for other options. Contributions http://leaf-project.org/mod.php?mod=userpagemenu=16page_id=22 -- Mike Noyes mhnoyes @ users.sourceforge.net http://sourceforge.net/users/mhnoyes/ http://leaf-project.org/ http://sitedocs.sf.net/ http://ffl.sf.net/ --- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! http://www.vasoftware.com -- -- leaf-user mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user SR FAQ: http://leaf-project.org/pub/doc/docmanager/docid_1891.html --- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! http://www.vasoftware.com leaf-user mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user SR FAQ: http://leaf-project.org/pub/doc/docmanager/docid_1891.html
Re: Fw: [leaf-user] Dachstein CD with Realtek 8139 NICs
Great! Thanks for the confirmation. I'm running into another issue though, when I run the unmount /mnt command after making changes to config files on the floppy I get the following msg: Unmount: not found Did I burn a bad copy of the CD or is there something I'm doing wrong? Chris At 06:48 AM 1/9/2003, you wrote: Yes, here is what I have in my /etc/modules ... ! mount iso9660 /dev/hda # Change the default directory, like this: ! dir /lib/modules/net ###Some ethernet cards #3c509 irq=5 pci-scan rtl8139 .. --- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! http://www.vasoftware.com leaf-user mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user SR FAQ: http://leaf-project.org/pub/doc/docmanager/docid_1891.html
Re: Fw: [leaf-user] Dachstein CD with Realtek 8139 NICs
try umount not unmount - Original Message - From: Chris Low [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2003 8:36 PM Subject: Re: Fw: [leaf-user] Dachstein CD with Realtek 8139 NICs Great! Thanks for the confirmation. I'm running into another issue though, when I run the unmount /mnt command after making changes to config files on the floppy I get the following msg: Unmount: not found Did I burn a bad copy of the CD or is there something I'm doing wrong? Chris At 06:48 AM 1/9/2003, you wrote: Yes, here is what I have in my /etc/modules ... ! mount iso9660 /dev/hda # Change the default directory, like this: ! dir /lib/modules/net ###Some ethernet cards #3c509 irq=5 pci-scan rtl8139 .. --- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! http://www.vasoftware.com leaf-user mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user SR FAQ: http://leaf-project.org/pub/doc/docmanager/docid_1891.html --- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! http://www.vasoftware.com leaf-user mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user SR FAQ: http://leaf-project.org/pub/doc/docmanager/docid_1891.html
Re: Fw: [leaf-user] Umount, not UNmount, Duhhh!
Okay, I'm an idiot =) Thanks for all the answers received and all your patience with an obvious newbie! Chris --- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! http://www.vasoftware.com leaf-user mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user SR FAQ: http://leaf-project.org/pub/doc/docmanager/docid_1891.html
Re: Fw: [leaf-user] Dachstein CD with Realtek 8139 NICs
At 11:36 AM 1/9/03 -0800, Chris Low wrote: Great! Thanks for the confirmation. I'm running into another issue though, when I run the unmount /mnt command after making changes to config files on the floppy I get the following msg: Unmount: not found Did I burn a bad copy of the CD or is there something I'm doing wrong? There is no Unmount command. The command is umount (and note the lower case; Umount won't work). -- ---Never tell me the odds! Ray Olszewski -- Han Solo Palo Alto, California, USA [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- --- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! http://www.vasoftware.com leaf-user mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user SR FAQ: http://leaf-project.org/pub/doc/docmanager/docid_1891.html
[leaf-user] LEAF 2.0.3 'default setup' problems (ping failing)
Hi, I'm a newbie, but would be grateful for help with the following: I set up the following isolated network in order to help learn/test my set-up of Bering 2.0.3: HOST'far' IP 1.2.3.1 running RH Linux 6.2 | | | 1.2.3.4/24 Bering firewall 192.168.1.254/24 | | | HOST'near' IP 192.168.1.2 running RH Linux 7.3 The Bering/Shorewall set-up is almost standard - I only changed what I believe is the necessary minimum. In th elong run I want to set up a link between two networks and do 1-to-1 NAT (SNAT) for connections from specific machines on one network (with private IPs) to the other (with some allocated IPs on the second network for these machines). Some configuration file content and output debug from the three machines is appended. I apologise if this doesn't include something that's particularly significant... In a nutshell, I can ping the firewall from both near and far. I can also ping near and far from the firewall. However I cannot ping far from near, but do not understand why not - Help please! OUTPUT on each machine: === HOST 'near' = netstat -nr --- Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags MSS Window irtt Iface 192.168.1.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U40 0 0 eth0 127.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 U40 0 0 lo 0.0.0.0 192.168.1.254 0.0.0.0 UG 40 0 0 eth0 ifconfig eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:50:04:C9:CB:38 inet addr:192.168.1.2 Bcast:192.168.1.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:35 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:54 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:4 collisions:0 txqueuelen:100 RX bytes:3088 (3.0 Kb) TX bytes:4730 (4.6 Kb) Interrupt:9 Base address:0x4000 loLink encap:Local Loopback inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0 UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:16436 Metric:1 RX packets:64 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:64 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 RX bytes:4834 (4.7 Kb) TX bytes:4834 (4.7 Kb) route - Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric RefUse Iface 192.168.1.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 00 eth0 127.0.0.0 * 255.0.0.0 U 0 00 lo default 192.168.1.254 0.0.0.0 UG0 00 eth0 /etc/hosts -- # Do not remove the following line, or various programs # that require network functionality will fail. 127.0.0.1 localhost.localdomain localhost 192.168.1.2 near 'ping' -- PING 1.2.3.4 (1.2.3.4) from 192.168.1.2 : 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 1.2.3.4: icmp_seq=1 ttl=255 time=0.297 ms 64 bytes from 1.2.3.4: icmp_seq=2 ttl=255 time=0.276 ms : --- 1.2.3.4 ping statistics --- 4 packets transmitted, 4 received, 0% loss, time 2997ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.276/0.283/0.297/0.018 ms PING 192.168.1.254 (192.168.1.254) from 192.168.1.2 : 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 192.168.1.254: icmp_seq=1 ttl=255 time=0.295 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.1.254: icmp_seq=2 ttl=255 time=0.274 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.1.254: icmp_seq=3 ttl=255 time=0.272 ms --- 192.168.1.254 ping statistics --- 3 packets transmitted, 3 received, 0% loss, time 1998ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.272/0.280/0.295/0.017 ms PING 192.168.1.2 (192.168.1.2) from 192.168.1.2 : 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 192.168.1.2: icmp_seq=1 ttl=255 time=0.045 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.1.2: icmp_seq=2 ttl=255 time=0.035 ms --- 192.168.1.2 ping statistics --- 2 packets transmitted, 2 received, 0% loss, time 999ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.035/0.040/0.045/0.005 ms PING 1.2.3.1 (1.2.3.1) from 192.168.1.2 : 56(84) bytes of data. --- 1.2.3.1 ping statistics --- 8 packets transmitted, 0 received, 100% loss, time 7011ms HOST 'far' ifconfig eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:00:86:31:F1:C1 inet addr:1.2.3.1 Bcast:1.2.3.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:51 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:69 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:1 collisions:0 txqueuelen:100 Interrupt:10 Base address:0x300 loLink encap:Local Loopback inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0 UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:3924 Metric:1 RX packets:25 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:25 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric RefUse Iface far *
Re: [leaf-user] LEAF 2.0.3 'default setup' problems (ping failing)
On the router, what is the output of this command? cat /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward It should be 1. If it is 0, then you do not have IP forwarding turned on on the rotuer, and it will not route anything. Fixing that would probably (I'm no expert on Bering config files, I fear) involve changing the first line in /etc/options: /etc/options ip_forward=no spoofprotect=yes syncookies=no to ip_forward=yes. If that's not it, then the problem is most likely in the firewall ruleset. I'm also not a Shorewall expert, but either one of the Shorewall experts can tell you its command for reporting firewall details, or you can report the underlying rules with iptables -nvL Final thought: since this is an isolated network, I assume that the external network really is 1.2.3.0/24, not that you are chainging addresses to conceal information. If this assumption is wrong, please use the real numbers next time, since changing them in troubleshooting reports can conceal problems. At 10:23 PM 1/9/03 -0800, Wynne Crompton wrote: Hi, I'm a newbie, but would be grateful for help with the following: I set up the following isolated network in order to help learn/test my set-up of Bering 2.0.3: HOST'far' IP 1.2.3.1 running RH Linux 6.2 | | | 1.2.3.4/24 Bering firewall 192.168.1.254/24 | | | HOST'near' IP 192.168.1.2 running RH Linux 7.3 The Bering/Shorewall set-up is almost standard - I only changed what I believe is the necessary minimum. In th elong run I want to set up a link between two networks and do 1-to-1 NAT (SNAT) for connections from specific machines on one network (with private IPs) to the other (with some allocated IPs on the second network for these machines). Some configuration file content and output debug from the three machines is appended. I apologise if this doesn't include something that's particularly significant... In a nutshell, I can ping the firewall from both near and far. I can also ping near and far from the firewall. However I cannot ping far from near, but do not understand why not - Help please! [detailed diagnostics deleted] -- ---Never tell me the odds! Ray Olszewski -- Han Solo Palo Alto, California, USA [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- --- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! http://www.vasoftware.com leaf-user mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user SR FAQ: http://leaf-project.org/pub/doc/docmanager/docid_1891.html
Re: [leaf-user] LEAF 2.0.3 'default setup' problems (ping failing)
On Thu, 2003-01-09 at 16:05, Ray Olszewski wrote: If that's not it, then the problem is most likely in the firewall ruleset. I'm also not a Shorewall expert, but either one of the Shorewall experts can tell you its command for reporting firewall details, or you can report the underlying rules with iptables -nvL Ray, Tom recommends the use of /sbin/shorewall status Ref. http://shorewall.net/support.htm -- Mike Noyes mhnoyes @ users.sourceforge.net http://sourceforge.net/users/mhnoyes/ http://leaf-project.org/ http://sitedocs.sf.net/ http://ffl.sf.net/ --- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! http://www.vasoftware.com leaf-user mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user SR FAQ: http://leaf-project.org/pub/doc/docmanager/docid_1891.html
Re: [leaf-user] LEAF 2.0.3 'default setup' problems (ping failing)
Wynne, Ray did a good job with the general, low-level debugging suggestions. Unless you've made drastic setup changes, I expect IP forwarding to already be enabled. If that's the case, the next place to check is firewall rules and policies. The best advice I can give is to keep a close eye on /var/log/syslog while debugging. Both tail -f /var/log/syslog and shorewall status can be invaluable. You may also want to check the value of FORWARDPING in /etc/shorewall/shorewall.conf and noping and filterping in /etc/shorewall/interfaces. Failed pings are also documented well in the shorewall docs. Search for ping in the FAQs and Troubleshooting documents at http://shorewall.net/ for details. Hope that helps get you started. --Brad On Thu, 09 Jan 2003 22:23:21 PST Wynne Crompton wrote: Hi, I'm a newbie, but would be grateful for help with the following: I set up the following isolated network in order to help learn/test my set-up of Bering 2.0.3: HOST 'far' IP 1.2.3.1 running RH Linux 6.2 | | | 1.2.3.4/24 Bering firewall 192.168.1.254/24 | | | HOST 'near' IP 192.168.1.2 running RH Linux 7.3 The Bering/Shorewall set-up is almost standard - I only changed what I believe is the necessary minimum. In th elong run I want to set up a link between two networks and do 1-to-1 NAT (SNAT) for connections from specific machines on one network (with private IPs) to the other (with some allocated IPs on the second network for these machines). Some configuration file content and output debug from the three machines is appended. I apologise if this doesn't include something that's particularly significant... In a nutshell, I can ping the firewall from both near and far. I can also ping near and far from the firewall. However I cannot ping far from near, but do not understand why not - Help please! [setup details snipped] --- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! http://www.vasoftware.com leaf-user mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user SR FAQ: http://leaf-project.org/pub/doc/docmanager/docid_1891.html
Re: [leaf-user] LEAF 2.0.3 'default setup' problems (ping failing)
On Thu, 2003-01-09 at 16:58, Brad Fritz wrote: Failed pings are also documented well in the shorewall docs. Search for ping in the FAQs and Troubleshooting documents at http://shorewall.net/ for details. Brad, The Shorewall ping information is here: ICMP Echo-request (Ping) http://shorewall.sourceforge.net/ping.html And ours is here: What are the ways that ping fails and what do they mean? http://sourceforge.net/docman/display_doc.php?docid=4099group_id=13751 Why can't the LEAF router ping its own interfaces? http://sourceforge.net/docman/display_doc.php?docid=1433group_id=13751 Why can't the LEAF router ping hosts on the LAN? http://sourceforge.net/docman/display_doc.php?docid=1434group_id=13751 Why can't the LEAF router ping its external gateway? http://sourceforge.net/docman/display_doc.php?docid=1435group_id=13751 Why can't the LEAF router ping hosts on the Internet? http://sourceforge.net/docman/display_doc.php?docid=4100group_id=13751 Why can't hosts on the LAN ping hosts on the Internet? http://sourceforge.net/docman/display_doc.php?docid=1436group_id=13751 -- Mike Noyes mhnoyes @ users.sourceforge.net http://sourceforge.net/users/mhnoyes/ http://leaf-project.org/ http://sitedocs.sf.net/ http://ffl.sf.net/ --- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! http://www.vasoftware.com leaf-user mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user SR FAQ: http://leaf-project.org/pub/doc/docmanager/docid_1891.html
Re: [leaf-user] Tulip drivers on Bering 1.0 Stable
Hello! As an aside, don't forget that newer FA311's are not Tulip (DEC 21140) based at all, but rather use a NetGear-specific chip. I use these extensively in my firewalls, and they use the fa311.o driver instead. Tim Massey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 01/09/2003 06:40:24 PM: You need to insmod pci-scan.o and then tulip.o. It runs fine in my system with 2 DEC cards. --- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! http://www.vasoftware.com leaf-user mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user SR FAQ: http://leaf-project.org/pub/doc/docmanager/docid_1891.html
[leaf-user] Bad Bering natsemi.o driver?
Hi folks, I'm preparing a new box with the latest, stable Bering and I'm wondering if the driver might be bad? I downloaded the natsemi.o driver for the Netgear FA311 NICs I have from http://leaf.sourceforge.net/devel/jnilo/bering/latest/modules/2.4.20/net /, and when I use it, only eth0 is detected and not eth1 as well. Fortunately, I have another natsemi.o driver that apparently I downloaded at some point in the past and it seems to work fine with both NICs. I wanted to bring this to the groups' attention if the driver that's posted is in fact (somehow) defective??? Comments??? Best Regards, Craig --- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! http://www.vasoftware.com leaf-user mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user SR FAQ: http://leaf-project.org/pub/doc/docmanager/docid_1891.html
Re: [leaf-user] Bad Bering natsemi.o driver?
Craig Caughlin wrote: Hi folks, I'm preparing a new box with the latest, stable Bering and I'm wondering if the driver might be bad? I downloaded the natsemi.o driver for the Netgear FA311 NICs I have from http://leaf.sourceforge.net/devel/jnilo/bering/latest/modules/2.4.20/net /, and when I use it, only eth0 is detected and not eth1 as well. Fortunately, I have another natsemi.o driver that apparently I downloaded at some point in the past and it seems to work fine with both NICs. I wanted to bring this to the groups' attention if the driver that's posted is in fact (somehow) defective??? Comments??? Best Regards, Craig Craig, I think maybe the one you got depends on pci_scan.o so you may need that too when you use the drivers from the becker area. There is another natsemi driver from the kernel proper that doesn't require pci_scan in this area: http://leaf.sourceforge.net/devel/jnilo/bering/latest/modules/2.4.20/kernel/drivers/net/ I don't completely understand the difference between the two driver sets. Anyhow, I struggled with natsemi drivers for FA311 for a few weeks off and on. Thought the board was bad. Eventually found out that my cable isp (charter) required the same mac address as my old board to work. They said I had to leave the new natsemi board connected for 24 hours to be detected and registered by their system. (Seems like I should have just been able to tell them the mac, but no.) Anyhow, ended up compiling a newer version of natsemi.c that had hook for hardcoding a new mac addr. Used the User Mode Linux woody environment on Redhat to do the compile for Bering and it worked! So, I suspect that the natsemi driver, at least the one in the kernel area is ok since it is very similar to what I used. -gene --- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! http://www.vasoftware.com leaf-user mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user SR FAQ: http://leaf-project.org/pub/doc/docmanager/docid_1891.html
[leaf-user] syslinux problem
I'm trying to install the wisp distro. I've never used syslinux before. When I follow the instructions in the wisp docs for installation, when I then reboot, it says, boot failed. Any hints? I've tried it exactly as described, and also using grub. Can I replace syslinux with grub entirely (I think I can), and if so, how do I do it? Thanks and best regards, Chris Buxton --- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! http://www.vasoftware.com leaf-user mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user SR FAQ: http://leaf-project.org/pub/doc/docmanager/docid_1891.html
[leaf-user] Could not mount the boot device error message
Hi folks, I'm making a new Bering bootable CD, and I think I have followed the step by step instructions in the Bering user's guide exactly, and I get this error message: end_request: I/O error, dev 02:00 (floppy), sector 0 end_request: I/O error, dev 02:00 (floppy), sector 0 LINUXRC: Could not mount the boot device. Can't install packages. Kernel Panic: Attempted to kill init! I've made a bootable CD before, but I'm obviously forgetting something. Suggestions? Best Regards, Craig --- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! http://www.vasoftware.com leaf-user mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user SR FAQ: http://leaf-project.org/pub/doc/docmanager/docid_1891.html
RE: Fw: [leaf-user] Umount, not UNmount, Duhhh!
Don't be too hard on yourself. Everyone is a newbie at least once. ;-)) (I have asked worse questions to this list and been very impressed how nice everyone was to me.) -Original Message- From: Chris Low [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2003 2:09 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:Re: Fw: [leaf-user] Umount, not UNmount, Duhhh! Okay, I'm an idiot =) Thanks for all the answers received and all your patience with an obvious newbie! Chris --- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! http://www.vasoftware.com leaf-user mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user SR FAQ: http://leaf-project.org/pub/doc/docmanager/docid_1891.html --- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! http://www.vasoftware.com leaf-user mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user SR FAQ: http://leaf-project.org/pub/doc/docmanager/docid_1891.html
Re: [leaf-user] Tulip drivers on Bering 1.0 Stable
You need to insmod pci-scan.o and then tulip.o. It runs fine in my system with 2 DEC cards. --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, I have been using EigerStein 2-Beta for about three years and have been very satisfied with it. I recently changed ISP's and need to use PPPoE and decided to upgrade to Bering 1.0 Stable. I am using a 100 MHZ Pentium with 40 meg of Ram. I use two Netgear FA311 network cards. I used the tulip driver with Eiger and had no problems, but when I install the driver with Bering (the driver came from the Bering 1.0 stable modules download) I get unresolved symbol messages. I was wondering if the drivers need to be recompiled or if there is something new that I have to do to get the drivers to load. Thanks for the help. I really appreciate all the time that has been put into Leaf. Wayne Fool * This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. www.hubbell.com - Hubbell Incorporated * --- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! http://www.vasoftware.com leaf-user mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user SR FAQ: http://leaf-project.org/pub/doc/docmanager/docid_1891.html __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com --- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! http://www.vasoftware.com leaf-user mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user SR FAQ: http://leaf-project.org/pub/doc/docmanager/docid_1891.html
