[leaf-user] AIC-6915 starfire
Dear All. Any body have a source or binary of starfire.o foir 2.2.16 kernel ? AIC-6915 starfire -- Adaptec 4 port fast ethernet card Sincerely -bino- --- This SF.net email is sponsored by:Crypto Challenge is now open! Get cracking and register here for some mind boggling fun and the chance of winning an Apple iPod: http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?thaw0031en 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 1.1 partial backup issue
Ahh - stupid me. Spending some time looking in the archives I found a similar problem. Sean - if U are there and U corrected the problem - do U mind posting the fix? Thanks Jorn - Original Message - From: Jørn Eriksen [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, March 15, 2003 9:49 PM Subject: [leaf-user] Bering 1.1 partial backup issue Hello there, It seams that there is a bug in the set backup type script in Bering 1.1 In my case IPsec is package no 13 so I use: # t 13 then the line for that package become: 18) ipseccdrom iso9660 As one can see the information on backup type completely go away. If I also try to set the destination everything go wrong. Any clues? Thanks Jorn --- This SF.net email is sponsored by:Crypto Challenge is now open! Get cracking and register here for some mind boggling fun and the chance of winning an Apple iPod: http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?thaw0031en 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:Crypto Challenge is now open! Get cracking and register here for some mind boggling fun and the chance of winning an Apple iPod: http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?thaw0031en 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] dachstein NTP Internal Time Server - Up and running
William Brinkman wrote: All, I put the NTP rpm in my mandrake 9.0 linux box. Set the ntp.conf server to 192.168.1.254 (firewall address). Inserted a /etc/ntp.drift and put a 1 in the file. Started the ntpd daemon. Tested out the troubleshooting guide and on the mandrake box tried a: # ntpq -p 192.168.1.254 The results indicated that the firewall was doing its job as a time server. The display indicated every server I had in the conf file of the fire wall as well as detailed statistics on how much they vary from each other. Now the strange part: From the M$ box, using Automachron time update software, the time will sync fine to the mandrake box, but still has the socket error for the firewall. Looks like I need to test some other software that will be more forgiving with the firewall. Before you give up on your current setup, try pointing your M$ client to any other valid IP's on the firewall box (not just the internal interface IP). You should have at least one more IP: the IP of your external interface. This may not be an issue with the NTP server you're using, but I've had problems with IP aliases and NTP servers before. Things would seem to be working properly, but I couldn't get NTP clients to sync to any but the primary IP of an interface. Of course, if you've got a Mandrake box available, I'd just set that up as you local time server, and sync everything (including the firewall) to it. -- Charles Steinkuehler [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- This SF.net email is sponsored by:Crypto Challenge is now open! Get cracking and register here for some mind boggling fun and the chance of winning an Apple iPod: http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?thaw0031en 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 1.1 partial backup issue
Well, If your talking to me... I have not tried Bering 1.1 yet. Keeping meaning to, but lots of other projects have popped up. First of all, Bering has not included the proper files to do a real partial backup. These files are called packagename.local. If the backup script can't find the .local file, it defaults to the .conf (which is often good enough). The only problem I have had with partial backups was when my .local files had some DOS cr/lf characters in them. The script would barf. Never seen the symptoms you are having... Wait, look at your syslinx.cfg file and make sure you are not loading a package twice. I've seen that confuse the backup scripts. Also, did you edit your /var/lib/lrpkg/backdisk file at all? You might want to attach that file to your next Email, and your /var/lib/lrpkg/ipsec.bktype file as well. These are the two files that control the backup. Sean On Mon, 2003-03-17 at 06:38, Jorn Eriksen wrote: Ahh - stupid me. Spending some time looking in the archives I found a similar problem. Sean - if U are there and U corrected the problem - do U mind posting the fix? Thanks Jorn - Original Message - From: Jørn Eriksen [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, March 15, 2003 9:49 PM Subject: [leaf-user] Bering 1.1 partial backup issue Hello there, It seams that there is a bug in the set backup type script in Bering 1.1 In my case IPsec is package no 13 so I use: # t 13 then the line for that package become: 18) ipseccdrom iso9660 As one can see the information on backup type completely go away. If I also try to set the destination everything go wrong. Any clues? Thanks Jorn --- This SF.net email is sponsored by:Crypto Challenge is now open! Get cracking and register here for some mind boggling fun and the chance of winning an Apple iPod: http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?thaw0031en 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:Crypto Challenge is now open! Get cracking and register here for some mind boggling fun and the chance of winning an Apple iPod: http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?thaw0031en 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 -- Sean E. Covel [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- This SF.net email is sponsored by:Crypto Challenge is now open! Get cracking and register here for some mind boggling fun and the chance of winning an Apple iPod: http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?thaw0031en 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] Bering and Netmeeting
Hello I am testing Bering 1.0 and Netmeeting behind the firewall with 50% success. I included ip_nat_h323.o and ip_conntrack_h323.o modules at startup. The link is 256K ADSL. My internal PC has IP 192.168.1.11. The other PC has a public fixed IP. Incoming calls works well (audio and video), from a the other PC with public IP to my private IP (192.168.1.11). But my outgoing calls doesn't work. In the other PC appears a message like Waiting confirmation from 192.168.1.11, but in my netmeeting doesn't appears any message. This IP should be my eth0 IP. I think this is related to SNAT setting. What would be this setting? Should I put ADD_SNAT_ALIASES=Yes in /etc/shorewall/shorewall.conf? Regards Heriberto --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.459 / Virus Database: 258 - Release Date: 25/02/03 ¡Internet GRATIS es Yahoo! Conexión! Usuario yahoo, contraseña yahoo. Desde Buenos Aires, 4004-1010. Otras ciudades: http://conexion.yahoo.com.ar/avanzados.html --- This SF.net email is sponsored by:Crypto Challenge is now open! Get cracking and register here for some mind boggling fun and the chance of winning an Apple iPod: http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?thaw0031en 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] Bering 1.1 and NAT-Traversal
Hi guys, I'm experiencing a problem with Bering 1.1 and NAT Traversal. Everything but NAT Traversal works fine; Pluto complains in my /var/log/daemon.log: ipsec__plutorun: 003 NAT-Traversal: ESPINUDP(1) not supported by kernel - NAT-Traversal. Any ideas? The only solution is to recompile the kernel? Thanx Lino --- This SF.net email is sponsored by:Crypto Challenge is now open! Get cracking and register here for some mind boggling fun and the chance of winning an Apple iPod: http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?thaw0031en 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] ppp0 vs eth0
Hello I tried my first ADSL connection. I thought the interface connecting to Internet would be eth0, but it is ppp0. Is this correct or is something wrong? # ip addr 1: lo: LOOPBACK,UP mtu 16436 qdisc noqueue link/loopback 00:00:00:00:00:00 brd 00:00:00:00:00:00 inet 127.0.0.1/8 brd 127.255.255.255 scope host lo 2: dummy0: BROADCAST,NOARP mtu 1500 qdisc noop link/ether 00:00:00:00:00:00 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff 3: eth0: BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast qlen 100 link/ether 00:c0:df:f5:02:4a brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff 4: eth1: BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast qlen 100 link/ether 00:c0:df:ec:4e:74 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff inet 192.168.1.254/24 brd 192.168.1.255 scope global eth1 5: ppp0: POINTOPOINT,MULTICAST,NOARP,UP mtu 1492 qdisc pfifo_fast qlen 3 link/ppp inet 200.45.218.59 peer 200.3.62.138/32 scope global ppp0 # /etc/network/interfaces # Loopback interface. auto lo iface lo inet loopback # Option 1.3: PPP/PPPOE (modem connected to eth0) auto ppp0 iface ppp0 inet ppp pre-up ip link set eth0 up provider dsl-provider eth0 # # Option 1.4: PPP modem #auto ppp0 #iface ppp0 inet ppp # provider provider # Step 2: configure internal interface # Default: eth1 / fixed IP = 192.168.1.254 auto eth1 iface eth1 inet static address 192.168.1.254 masklen 24 broadcast 192.168.1.255 Regards Heriberto ¡Internet GRATIS es Yahoo! Conexión! Usuario yahoo, contraseña yahoo. Desde Buenos Aires, 4004-1010. Otras ciudades: http://conexion.yahoo.com.ar/avanzados.html --- This SF.net email is sponsored by:Crypto Challenge is now open! Get cracking and register here for some mind boggling fun and the chance of winning an Apple iPod: http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?thaw0031en 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] ppp0 vs eth0
At 02:34 PM 3/17/2003 -0300, Heriberto Höhlke wrote: Hello I tried my first ADSL connection. I thought the interface connecting to Internet would be eth0, but it is ppp0. Is this correct or is something wrong? It's probably fine, but the technical answer to your question is it depends. Cheap DSL connections typically use PPPoE (PPP Over Ethernet) to make the connection and authenticate users. This is, as you'd guess from the name, a type of PPP connection, so uses a ppp* interface. In this setup, the Ethernet connection acts as a carrier for the PPP connection, serving a role analogous to an analog phone connection ... the eth* interface associated with the device is not used at the IP level. This is what you almost surely have (at least if the setup you describe below actually works ... and it appears to, since the ppp0 interface is getting an IP address asignment). Some DSL connections -- the better home-level ones, and all business-level ones I'm familiar with -- do not use PPPoE. They use ordinary Ethernet, typically with static address assignment (though DHCP is a possibility too). These connections will use eth* interfaces. # ip addr 1: lo: LOOPBACK,UP mtu 16436 qdisc noqueue link/loopback 00:00:00:00:00:00 brd 00:00:00:00:00:00 inet 127.0.0.1/8 brd 127.255.255.255 scope host lo 2: dummy0: BROADCAST,NOARP mtu 1500 qdisc noop link/ether 00:00:00:00:00:00 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff 3: eth0: BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast qlen 100 link/ether 00:c0:df:f5:02:4a brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff 4: eth1: BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast qlen 100 link/ether 00:c0:df:ec:4e:74 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff inet 192.168.1.254/24 brd 192.168.1.255 scope global eth1 5: ppp0: POINTOPOINT,MULTICAST,NOARP,UP mtu 1492 qdisc pfifo_fast qlen 3 link/ppp inet 200.45.218.59 peer 200.3.62.138/32 scope global ppp0 # /etc/network/interfaces # Loopback interface. auto lo iface lo inet loopback # Option 1.3: PPP/PPPOE (modem connected to eth0) auto ppp0 iface ppp0 inet ppp pre-up ip link set eth0 up provider dsl-provider eth0 # # Option 1.4: PPP modem #auto ppp0 #iface ppp0 inet ppp # provider provider # Step 2: configure internal interface # Default: eth1 / fixed IP = 192.168.1.254 auto eth1 iface eth1 inet static address 192.168.1.254 masklen 24 broadcast 192.168.1.255 --- This SF.net email is sponsored by:Crypto Challenge is now open! Get cracking and register here for some mind boggling fun and the chance of winning an Apple iPod: http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?thaw0031en 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
AW: [leaf-user] ppp0 vs eth0
I tried my first ADSL connection. I thought the interface connecting to Internet would be eth0, but it is ppp0. Is this correct or is something wrong? This is correct and as expected. eth0 is just the interface used to talk to the modem # /etc/network/interfaces # Loopback interface. # Option 1.3: PPP/PPPOE (modem connected to eth0) auto ppp0 iface ppp0 inet ppp pre-up ip link set eth0 up provider dsl-provider eth0 See, you even ask for interface ppp0 here! Cheers Alex --- This SF.net email is sponsored by:Crypto Challenge is now open! Get cracking and register here for some mind boggling fun and the chance of winning an Apple iPod: http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?thaw0031en 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
AW: [leaf-user] Bering 1.1 and NAT-Traversal
Lino I'm experiencing a problem with Bering 1.1 and NAT Traversal. Everything but NAT Traversal works fine; Pluto complains in my /var/log/daemon.log: ipsec__plutorun: 003 NAT-Traversal: ESPINUDP(1) not supported by kernel - NAT-Traversal. Any ideas? The only solution is to recompile the kernel? You could use the kernel I compiled, it's on http://leaf-project.org/mod.php?mod=userpagemenu=1402page_id=49 and includes Super FreeS/WAN with NAT-T support. You also have to use the kernel modules and ipsec.lrp supplied there. Cheers Alex --- This SF.net email is sponsored by:Crypto Challenge is now open! Get cracking and register here for some mind boggling fun and the chance of winning an Apple iPod: http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?thaw0031en 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] new WISP-Dist build 2546
This has fixed the lock up's I was getting with Teletronics and the Teletronics High power 20db cards.. Goog Catch.. Does this current driver allow for radius mac authentication? if so is the patch or complile option included in this build? if not, This would be an excellent additional feature to your WIP compileation.. Great work by the way.. Vladimir Ivaschenko wrote: Hello All, A new WISP-Dist test build (2546) is available from http://www.hazard.maks.net/wisp-dist/downloads/. I did stress testing of Prism and Cisco cards on Soekris and Teletronics boards and found several stability issues in the drivers. The good news is it seems that I've been able to overcome them. Hostap driver is reverted to an old version used in 2.4.18-based WISP-Dist releases, as new one from CVS seems to be very unstable, at least in slow motherboards. Cisco driver was updated to the new version Cisco released a couple of days, and looks to be quite stable as well (the previous Cisco driver could end up with card being locked up and not able to send anything). Also trafshow utility is included. This is a quite useful utility to look at per-host traffic statistics, especially if your system is not powerful enough to run ntop. -- Marty Buchaus CTO Big Sky Internet Inc. - http://www.bigskyinternet.com RHCE (Red Hat Certified Engineer) - 807101943103186 ICQ 10579998 AIM snuffychi --- This SF.net email is sponsored by:Crypto Challenge is now open! Get cracking and register here for some mind boggling fun and the chance of winning an Apple iPod: http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?thaw0031en 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: AW: [leaf-user] Bering 1.1 and NAT-Traversal
Le Lundi 17 Mars 2003 18:54, Alex Rhomberg a écrit : Lino I'm experiencing a problem with Bering 1.1 and NAT Traversal. Everything but NAT Traversal works fine; Pluto complains in my /var/log/daemon.log: ipsec__plutorun: 003 NAT-Traversal: ESPINUDP(1) not supported by kernel - NAT-Traversal. Any ideas? The only solution is to recompile the kernel? You could use the kernel I compiled, it's on http://leaf-project.org/mod.php?mod=userpagemenu=1402page_id=49 and includes Super FreeS/WAN with NAT-T support. You also have to use the kernel modules and ipsec.lrp supplied there. Alex: Bering 1.1 kernel is patched with all the patches included here: http://leaf.sf.net/devel/jnilo/bering/1.1/development/kernel/ and here: http://leaf.sf.net/devel/jnilo/bering/1.1/development/freeswan-1.99/ Apparently I did something wrong either applying the NAT Traversal patches or in my kernel config file. Any idea ? Jacques --- This SF.net email is sponsored by:Crypto Challenge is now open! Get cracking and register here for some mind boggling fun and the chance of winning an Apple iPod: http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?thaw0031en 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] ANN: New project RSS feeds available
Today SourceForge added project RSS feeds to the hosting services they provide. You can now easily track various project information: News items, DocManager updates, new File releases, and Summary information. Project RSS Feeds: leaf http://sourceforge.net/export/rss2_project.php?group_id=13751 Additional information on the new RSS feeds provided by SourceForge are explained in the document below. Information regarding SourceForge.net-provided RSS feeds http://sourceforge.net/docman/display_doc.php?docid=15483group_id=1 -- 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:Crypto Challenge is now open! Get cracking and register here for some mind boggling fun and the chance of winning an Apple iPod: http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?thaw0031en 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] port open for Exchange?
I need to reconfigure our Dachstein 1.0.2 router to interoperate with our Outlook Web Access (OWA) which is the web interface for our Exchange 5.5 box. The Exchange box is in our internal network and initially accepts incoming http requests at port 80 but redirects it over to port 443 for SSL encryption. The question I have is- do I need to open port 443 on the router in order to pass packets onto the Exchange box? What I am thinking is since we've enabled NAT on the router, would the Exchange box commence packet exchange at port 443 from the internal network thus enabling connection via NAT with the external client? ~Doug --- This SF.net email is sponsored by:Crypto Challenge is now open! Get cracking and register here for some mind boggling fun and the chance of winning an Apple iPod: http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?thaw0031en 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] Help Loading drivers
Hi folks, I'm using what I think is Donald Becker's natsemi.o driver, which I understand needs to have the pci-scan.o loaded first. How do I do that???...do I just make an entry in the appropriate file above the natsemi.o or is there something else I need to do??? Thank you. Craig --- This SF.net email is sponsored by:Crypto Challenge is now open! Get cracking and register here for some mind boggling fun and the chance of winning an Apple iPod: http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?thaw0031en 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] dachstein NTP Internal Time Server - Up and running
I was curious, so I tried to hit my firewall without making any changes to its current state. I used a program call NetLab 1.4, freeware for windows. It has a time snyc function I use to keep my clocks updated. When I hit the main time server that worked through the firewall - salmon.maths.tcd.ie - my clocks are in sync. The program has options to sync via TCP, UDP or SNTP. When I hit the internet server, all work except the UDP protocol. It crashes Winsock on my winxp box. When I try to sync with the firewall INTERNAL IP Address - it fails on all EXCEPT SNTP, however that is so far off, it gave me the date from 1994. I logged on the firewall and did a date and/or hwclock command and it shows the correct date and time. When I try my external IP address, it only works with SNTP and then again it gives me a date from 1994. I hope this was able to help in your troubleshooting Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 07:00:00 -0600 From: Charles Steinkuehler [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: William Brinkman [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [leaf-user] dachstein NTP Internal Time Server - Up and running William Brinkman wrote: All, I put the NTP rpm in my mandrake 9.0 linux box. Set the ntp.conf server to 192.168.1.254 (firewall address). Inserted a /etc/ntp.drift and put a 1 in the file. Started the ntpd daemon. Tested out the troubleshooting guide and on the mandrake box tried a: # ntpq -p 192.168.1.254 The results indicated that the firewall was doing its job as a time server. The display indicated every server I had in the conf file of the fire wall as well as detailed statistics on how much they vary from each other. Now the strange part: From the M$ box, using Automachron time update software, the time will sync fine to the mandrake box, but still has the socket error for the firewall. Looks like I need to test some other software that will be more forgiving with the firewall. Before you give up on your current setup, try pointing your M$ client to any other valid IP's on the firewall box (not just the internal interface IP). You should have at least one more IP: the IP of your external interface. This may not be an issue with the NTP server you're using, but I've had problems with IP aliases and NTP servers before. Things would seem to be working properly, but I couldn't get NTP clients to sync to any but the primary IP of an interface. Of course, if you've got a Mandrake box available, I'd just set that up as you local time server, and sync everything (including the firewall) to it. -- Charles Steinkuehler [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- This SF.net email is sponsored by:Crypto Challenge is now open! Get cracking and register here for some mind boggling fun and the chance of winning an Apple iPod: http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?thaw0031en 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] iptraf and ncurses on Bering 1.0/1.1
Helo! I have also tryed to install iptraf. I also installed sshd but when I try to run iptraf true ssh client from my bering 1.1 I recieved folowing warning Warning: unable to tag this process Press Enter to continue Error opening terminal: xterm. What is wrong? BTW: While I was working on my bering locally I receaved errors about opening terminal. Just like you. -- Ales :) On Mon, 10 Mar 2003, Adrian Wooster wrote: Has anyone had success in using iptraf.lrp and libncurs.lrp on Bering? When I've loaded as instructed, iptraf returns errors about opening terminal linux which I assume means its having problems with ncurses. The recommended ncurses package certainly appears to have loaded correctly. I seem to remember ntop.lrp has a similar issue at the console, but works okay from the web interface. Can anyone help? Adrian --- 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:Crypto Challenge is now open! Get cracking and register here for some mind boggling fun and the chance of winning an Apple iPod: http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?thaw0031en 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] CUSeeMe
Sorry. I didn't send this to the list. David Pitts IT Services Manager Reid Library University of Western Australia Telephone: (08) 9380 3492 Fax: (08) 9380 1012 -Original Message- From: David Pitts Sent: Tuesday, 18 March 2003 9:31 AM To: 'Lynn Avants' Subject: RE: [leaf-user] CUSeeMe Thanks Lynn. The uDHCP package did work better but still not quite right. The client was fine, worked like a charm, first time. The server appears to load but doesn't serve addresses. I don't remember if I said that before, but it was doing the same thing before you modified it. I just copied the package to my floppy and edited syslinux.cfg to add it and remove pump and dhcpd. Is that the right process? On the other question (cuseeme) I have contacted a fella who has developed a couple of patches which are available on patch-o-matic. However, I don't have the resources to make any thing of that. He is prepared to compile the things for me though if he can. Can you tell me what flavour of Linux LEAF is based on? I believe its Debian from memory? And can you tell me if the kernel 'newnat' support? Or maybe Jaques can? What do you know about patch-o-matic? Can it create modules or must it patch the kernel? I'm sorry if this seems too much off the LEAF track but I would appreciate any assistance. Thanks again. David Pitts IT Services Manager Reid Library University of Western Australia Telephone: (08) 9380 3492 Fax: (08) 9380 1012 -Original Message- From: Lynn Avants [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, 17 March 2003 1:39 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [leaf-user] CUSeeMe On Sunday 16 March 2003 07:15 pm, David Pitts wrote: Morning all. Can anyone give me any advice on getting CUSeeMe running through Bering 1? My Googling seems to indicate there are some patches required but I couldn't find anything compiled. Can anyone recommend a source of the modules I would need? Or a source of information? You'll need to use h323 support, IIRC. There should be ipmasq/iptables modules (or config) to add/use this support. BTW, did the updated udhcp package work better for you? -- ~Lynn Avants Linux Embedded Appliance Firewall Developer http://leaf.sourceforge.net http://www.guitarlynn.homelinux.org:81 --- This SF.net email is sponsored by:Crypto Challenge is now open! Get cracking and register here for some mind boggling fun and the chance of winning an Apple iPod: http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?thaw0031en 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:Crypto Challenge is now open! Get cracking and register here for some mind boggling fun and the chance of winning an Apple iPod: http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?thaw0031en 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] CUSeeMe
On Monday 17 March 2003 08:21 pm, David Pitts wrote: Thanks Lynn. The uDHCP package did work better but still not quite right. The client was fine, worked like a charm, first time. The server appears to load but doesn't serve addresses. I don't remember if I said that before, but it was doing the same thing before you modified it. I just copied the package to my floppy and edited syslinux.cfg to add it and remove pump and dhcpd. Is that the right process? Yes, that is the right order. I haven't had any problems with the server portion working with Bering-1.0. By chance, are you using eth1 for an internal interface, the 192.168.1.0 network addressing for your LAN, and enabled dhcp for the loc section of Shorewall? If any changes are made from the default Bering settings that affect these things, you must also make the proper changes to /etc/udhcpd.conf for the program to work. Just a WAG since I haven't had any problems myself in testing. On the other question (cuseeme) I have contacted a fella who has developed a couple of patches which are available on patch-o-matic. However, I don't have the resources to make any thing of that. He is prepared to compile the things for me though if he can. Can you tell me what flavour of Linux LEAF is based on? I believe its Debian from memory? And can you tell me if the kernel 'newnat' support? Or maybe Jaques can? Debian Slink for the userland stuff and Debain Woody for the kernel. Jacques has the necessary patches posted in his /devel directory. newnat is something I can't say I have ever heard of. What do you know about patch-o-matic? Can it create modules or must it patch the kernel? It patches the kernel source. I'm sorry if this seems too much off the LEAF track but I would appreciate any assistance. NP -- ~Lynn Avants Linux Embedded Appliance Firewall Developer http://leaf.sourceforge.net http://www.guitarlynn.homelinux.org:81 --- This SF.net email is sponsored by:Crypto Challenge is now open! Get cracking and register here for some mind boggling fun and the chance of winning an Apple iPod: http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?thaw0031en 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] dachstein NTP Internal Time Server - M$ freeware works
Kevin, Thanks for weighing in with your results. I am up and running with a M$ freeware called Dimension 4 on a 98se box. It uses the SNTP (Simple NTP) and for whatever reason, works well with the Dachstein firewall. It however, does not mention compatability with XP so - your mileage may vary. Charles S. brought up a valid point as to why I did not want the mandrake 9.0 box performing the time server duty with the others synchronizing off of it. Fairly simply, the firewall is up 24/7 while the mandrake box may get used on the occasional weekend. * Comments inserted in your text ** --- Kevin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I was curious, so I tried to hit my firewall without making any changes to its current state. I used a program call NetLab 1.4, freeware for windows. It has a time snyc function I use to keep my clocks updated. When I hit the main time server that worked through the firewall - salmon.maths.tcd.ie - my clocks are in sync. The program has options to sync via TCP, UDP or SNTP. When I hit the internet server, all work except the UDP protocol. It crashes Winsock on my winxp box. When I try to sync with the firewall INTERNAL IP Address - it fails on all EXCEPT SNTP, however that is so far off, it gave me the date from 1994. ** I trust you also put in the libm and ntpsimpl packages in your firewall. If so, you and I had the same experience that 'rdate' or 'real' ntp requests to the firewall box do not produce time information. ** I logged on the firewall and did a date and/or hwclock command and it shows the correct date and time. ** # date # hwclock --show ** When I try my external IP address, it only works with SNTP and then again it gives me a date from 1994. ** Completely uninformed opinion is that the time communication between the M$ and firewall have issues. My issue with Automochron sp? resulted in a socket error. You might have enough information coming back that NetLab 1.4 reads it and decides the info means 1994. ** I hope this was able to help in your troubleshooting __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Platinum - Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness, live on your desktop! http://platinum.yahoo.com --- This SF.net email is sponsored by:Crypto Challenge is now open! Get cracking and register here for some mind boggling fun and the chance of winning an Apple iPod: http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?thaw0031en 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] CUSeeMe
Debian Slink for the userland stuff and Debain Woody for the kernel. Jacques has the necessary patches posted in his /devel directory. newnat is something I can't say I have ever heard of. 'newnat' is a rewrite of the NAT code in NetFilter. It is included in the 2.4.20 kernel and hence is part of Bering 1.1. -Tom -- Tom Eastep\ Shorewall - iptables made easy Shoreline, \ http://shorewall.sf.net Washington USA \ [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- This SF.net email is sponsored by:Crypto Challenge is now open! Get cracking and register here for some mind boggling fun and the chance of winning an Apple iPod: http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?thaw0031en 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] CUSeeMe
Thanks Lynn. I will check the conf file. The other things are all true. Ie I use 192.168.1.xxx and eth1. David Pitts IT Services Manager Reid Library University of Western Australia Telephone: (08) 9380 3492 Fax: (08) 9380 1012 -Original Message- From: Lynn Avants [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, 18 March 2003 11:16 AM To: David Pitts Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [leaf-user] CUSeeMe On Monday 17 March 2003 08:21 pm, David Pitts wrote: Thanks Lynn. The uDHCP package did work better but still not quite right. The client was fine, worked like a charm, first time. The server appears to load but doesn't serve addresses. I don't remember if I said that before, but it was doing the same thing before you modified it. I just copied the package to my floppy and edited syslinux.cfg to add it and remove pump and dhcpd. Is that the right process? Yes, that is the right order. I haven't had any problems with the server portion working with Bering-1.0. By chance, are you using eth1 for an internal interface, the 192.168.1.0 network addressing for your LAN, and enabled dhcp for the loc section of Shorewall? If any changes are made from the default Bering settings that affect these things, you must also make the proper changes to /etc/udhcpd.conf for the program to work. Just a WAG since I haven't had any problems myself in testing. On the other question (cuseeme) I have contacted a fella who has developed a couple of patches which are available on patch-o-matic. However, I don't have the resources to make any thing of that. He is prepared to compile the things for me though if he can. Can you tell me what flavour of Linux LEAF is based on? I believe its Debian from memory? And can you tell me if the kernel 'newnat' support? Or maybe Jaques can? Debian Slink for the userland stuff and Debain Woody for the kernel. Jacques has the necessary patches posted in his /devel directory. newnat is something I can't say I have ever heard of. What do you know about patch-o-matic? Can it create modules or must it patch the kernel? It patches the kernel source. I'm sorry if this seems too much off the LEAF track but I would appreciate any assistance. NP -- ~Lynn Avants Linux Embedded Appliance Firewall Developer http://leaf.sourceforge.net http://www.guitarlynn.homelinux.org:81 --- This SF.net email is sponsored by:Crypto Challenge is now open! Get cracking and register here for some mind boggling fun and the chance of winning an Apple iPod: http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?thaw0031en 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] dachstein NTP Internal Time Server - Up and running
Kevin wrote: I was curious, so I tried to hit my firewall without making any changes to its current state. I used a program call NetLab 1.4, freeware for windows. It has a time snyc function I use to keep my clocks updated. When I hit the main time server that worked through the firewall - salmon.maths.tcd.ie - my clocks are in sync. The program has options to sync via TCP, UDP or SNTP. When I hit the internet server, all work except the UDP protocol. It crashes Winsock on my winxp box. When I try to sync with the firewall INTERNAL IP Address - it fails on all EXCEPT SNTP, however that is so far off, it gave me the date from 1994. I logged on the firewall and did a date and/or hwclock command and it shows the correct date and time. When I try my external IP address, it only works with SNTP and then again it gives me a date from 1994. I hope this was able to help in your troubleshooting Very strange... I'll stick with my previous recomendation: Run ntpd on your mandrake box (or some other full linux disto), and sync all internal clients to it, including your firewall. It sounds like the light-weight NTP server you're trying to run has some issues in your environment, and I personally don't think something like an NTP server should be running on the firewall anyway (run only those things that *HAVE* to be on the firewall for security...fewer applications running means fewer potential security risks). -- Charles Steinkuehler [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- This SF.net email is sponsored by:Crypto Challenge is now open! Get cracking and register here for some mind boggling fun and the chance of winning an Apple iPod: http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?thaw0031en 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] Help 'Loading drivers'
Just like this in your /etc/modules ## pci-scan must load first pci-scan natsemi ## Hi folks, I'm using what I think is Donald Becker's natsemi.o driver, which I understand needs to have the pci-scan.o loaded first. How do I do that???...do I just make an entry in the appropriate file above the natsemi.o or is there something else I need to do??? Thank you. Craig -- Jim TerWee | Our capacity for understanding is [EMAIL PROTECTED] | inversely proportional to how Invisimax| much we think we know. The more I | know, the more I don't know! --- This SF.net email is sponsored by:Crypto Challenge is now open! Get cracking and register here for some mind boggling fun and the chance of winning an Apple iPod: http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?thaw0031en 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
