Re: [Leaf-user] dialup with leaf - how?
You can try http://leaf.sourceforge.net/devel/khadley/ppp.html there is right now no direct link on my web pages to it cause I need some testers Let me know if it works for you - Original Message - From: Tim Wegner [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, February 02, 2002 12:25 PM Subject: [Leaf-user] dialup with leaf - how? I am sure this question is so obvious that I can't see the answer right in front of my nose! I am a happy user of Dachstein with dhcp DSL, but I have a friend who wants to use Dachstein with dialup. What is needed to use leaf (e.g. Dachstein) with ppp dialup? ppp.lrp? pppd.lrp? Can Kenneth Hadley's instructions for pppoe (which support pppoe over ethernet) be modified for dialup? I have seached the mail archives and a few of the leaf sites and haven't quite figure this out. I'm guessing this is very simple once one knows the answer :-) Tim Wegner ___ Leaf-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user ___ Leaf-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user
OT: Re: [Leaf-user] solution to modules not loading from CD
- Original Message - From: Victor McAllister [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: leaf-user [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, January 19, 2002 12:52 PM Subject: [Leaf-user] solution to modules not loading from CD A friend brought his brand new DCD router over to trouble shoot. He bought one of those Flex board + 700 MHz + 256 M RAM + tiny 6 x 6 case. (I can't afford the price tag - but it is pretty). sounds like one of these guys http://www.spacewalker.com/english/mainboard_detail_info.asp?number=142 $250 retail..just add SDRAM, CPU, HDD, and DVD/CDRW and you lave your ulitmate portable PC ;-) ___ Leaf-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user
Re: [Leaf-user] DCD PPPoE documentation needs fixing
Best Homer Simpson impression *DOH!* I will fix this boneheaded mistake... - Original Message - From: Victor McAllister [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 6:55 PM Subject: [Leaf-user] DCD PPPoE documentation needs fixing Kenneth the documentation here has an error. http://leaf.sourceforge.net/devel/khadley/pppoe-cd.html 7) Uncomment the modules you need for your NICs and add this to your /etc/network.conf: # Serial Support slhc ppp ppp_deflate bsd_comp 7) Uncomment the modules you need for your NICs and add this to your /etc/modules ^^^ # Serial Support slhc ppp ppp_deflate bsd_comp I have a friend who is trying to migrate from Eigerstein PPPoE to DCD PPPoE and this drove him nuts. ___ Leaf-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user
OT: Re: [Leaf-user] solution to modules not loading from CD
- Original Message - From: Victor McAllister [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [LEAF-user] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, January 19, 2002 2:03 PM Subject: Re: OT: Re: [Leaf-user] solution to modules not loading from CD A friend brought his brand new DCD router over to trouble shoot. He bought one of those Flex board + 700 MHz + 256 M RAM + tiny 6 x 6 case. (I can't afford the price tag - but it is pretty). sounds like one of these guys http://www.spacewalker.com/english/mainboard_detail_info.asp?number=142 $250 retail..just add SDRAM, CPU, HDD, and DVD/CDRW and you lave your ulitmate portable PC ;-) That is exactly what he bought. It too noisy for me - the fans scream. I also would prefer a better internal nic - 8139 based and of course it has only one PCI slot. But at 700 MHz, it should be able to handle his home based PPPoE connection. Talk about overkill. Massive overkill alright... Im deploying these things running a CDRW with GPL WebCDwriter ( http://wwwhomes.uni-bielefeld.de/jhaeger/webCDwriter/ ) as a cheap networked department CDR machine... Keeps users from requesting CDRW drives on their machines that they only use once or twice a month and keeps the cost buying CDR media down because you would buy in bulk rather than oneses and twoses -Kenneth Hadley ___ Leaf-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user
Re: [Leaf-user] glibc pppoe...
- Original Message - From: Charles Steinkuehler [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 8:29 AM Subject: Re: [Leaf-user] glibc pppoe... When LEAF leaves the single floppy behind, the entire project target changes and all the indications point to the change happening in the next 6 months or so. It seems that the primary developers are trying to keep the original target (floppy), and for that I commend them, it would be easy to simply abandon this target and move on to other ones. I for one still use the single floppy release as my primary home firewall. I have installed the DCD cd release in several different configurations including a harddrive, a flash drive, and a stand-alone cdrom, but in all honesty the floppy version stills does anything I need it to at home and it still intrigues me how well put together it is. Well, I *have* effectevly abandoned the 1440 floppy format (for anything other than the config floppy for a CD-ROM install), but I really want to keep a workable firewall running on a 1680K floppy. Note the new Dachstein releases are actually *SMALLER* than the previous EigerStein releases, while supporting more features! Charles Steinkuehler http://lrp.steinkuehler.net http://c0wz.steinkuehler.net (lrp.c0wz.com mirror) For which many of us are very grateful for your work Charles. Except for a config I'm under the opinion that the floppy is dead. In computer technology its a stagnate dinosaur whose time for retirement has long been late, however its reliability and being available on almost every PC has made it live on much longer than it should. If the advancement of the various projects in LEAF means goodbye to the floppy, then so be it. I look forward to all further improvements in all the various LEAF projects. Kenneth Hadley PC Network Specialist / Network-PC Systems Administrator McCormick Selph Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Leaf-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user
Re: [Leaf-devel] Re: [Leaf-user] glibc pppoe...
Kenneth Hadley PC Network Specialist McCormick Selph Inc. 831-637-3731 x363 [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 11:18 AM Subject: Re: [Leaf-devel] Re: [Leaf-user] glibc pppoe... On Fri, 18 January 2002, Kenneth Hadley wrote: - Original Message - From: Charles Steinkuehler Well, I *have* effectevly abandoned the 1440 floppy format (for anything other than the config floppy for a CD-ROM install), but I really want to keep a workable firewall running on a 1680K floppy. Note the new Dachstein releases are actually *SMALLER* than the previous EigerStein releases, while supporting more features! Charles Steinkuehler For which many of us are very grateful for your work Charles. Except for a config I'm under the opinion that the floppy is dead. In computer technology its a stagnate dinosaur whose time for retirement has long been late, however its reliability and being available on almost every PC has made it live on much longer than it should. If the advancement of the various projects in LEAF means goodbye to the floppy, then so be it. I look forward to all further improvements in all the various LEAF projects. Kenneth Hadley I like to have the floppy configuration avaiable. While it is 'old' technology, there remain many who cannot afford flash w/ide adaptors, etc. Since I have inheritted several older systems, it costs me little to nothing to set one up for someone. And while one or two have CD Rom drives, all have floppy drives. If they had to buy a flash or DOC, then they might as well buy a Linksys. With the LEAF floppy systems, I have found that half the folks get more interested in networking and Linux, which I regard as a plus. -sp $0.02 I totally understand and agree with most of what you have said, but when I look at new CDROM drives going for the same price tag of a new 1.44MB Floppy Drive it seams a more than a little funny that a old floppy drive is a more important media target for a project than something that is a lot more reliable and allows the project to do so much more. Of course this is just my .02 cents worth...and about a $1.98 short of something that makes sense ;-) -Kenneth Hadley ___ Leaf-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user
Re: [Leaf-user] Re: DCD package request for inclusion in next CD image
- Original Message - From: Charles Steinkuehler [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: LRPLEAF [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2002 5:53 AM Subject: [Leaf-user] Re: DCD package request for inclusion in next CD image I may open a floodgate by making this request, as other requests may follow from others, but here goes: please include the latest bind package in the next CD image of Dachstein. The 9.x versions of Bind don't really like compiling on a glibc as old as that used for LEAF, or I would have done this already... Charles Steinkuehler http://lrp.steinkuehler.net http://c0wz.steinkuehler.net (lrp.c0wz.com mirror) Same problem with 3.x series of the Roaring Penguin PPPoE client ___ Leaf-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user
FIXED! Re: [Leaf-user] Dachstein-CD v1.0.2 as a router only (no firewall)
- Original Message - From: Charles Steinkuehler [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Kenneth Hadley [EMAIL PROTECTED]; guitarlynn [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: LEAF-user [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, January 14, 2002 6:55 AM Subject: Re: [Leaf-user] Dachstein-CD v1.0.2 as a router only (no firewall) IPFILTER_SWITCH=router Does anyone have any thoughts on what I might have configured wrong? Change IPFILTER_SWITCH=none I'm guessing the my problems are related to some of the filter's too but unfortunately changing IPFILTER_SWITCH to none completely kills all traffic between 192.168.1.0 and 192.168.2.0 Worth a shot Um...did you try changing from: IPFWDING_KERNEL=FILTER_ON to: IPFWDING_KERNEL=YES This, combined with IPFILTER_SWITCH=none should get you a basic router... Charles Steinkuehler http://lrp.steinkuehler.net http://c0wz.steinkuehler.net (lrp.c0wz.com mirror) Have I tried those settings? Yes Have I tried those settings in that combination? Nope Does my problems go away with this combination? YES!! Thanks Charles! So if I understand it correctly: IPFWDING_KERNEL=YES IPFILTER_SWITCH=none sets your scripts to full routing of all traffic and IPFWDING_KERNEL=FILTER_ON IPFILTER_SWITCH=router sets your scripts to routing with filtering Is this correct? ___ Leaf-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user
[Leaf-user] Re: Dachstein PPPoE don't know
From what I can understand it looks like you dont have your NICs loaded correctly.. Im not sure which module would be needed since you didnt say what LinkSys NIC model you have.. Also, what is the output from the command ip addr ? And do make sure you a subscribed to the leaf-user mailing list at sourceforge.net ( http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user ) since Im not always able to respond to emails sent to my personal email accounts but other folks on the LEAF mailing list might be able to help -Kenneth Hadley - Original Message - From: John Atkeison [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Kenneth Hadley [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: LEAF-user [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2002 6:28 PM Subject: Dachstein PPPoE don't know I am so far behind the curve that I don't know where to start. 8-} I have a Dachstein floppy firewall on my DSL (Speakeasy static IP) at my office, and have _that_one_ mostly figured out. I've been futzing with 1.02 floppy pppoe dachstein for my home Verizon DSL connection for a couple weeks off on in my spare time, with little success. I am afraid that I do not know enuf to ask intelligent questions, so I will describe a bit of my setup and se what y'all have to point me to. (Refs to docs are fine- I am trying to educate myself so I can set this up for a non-profit client of mine, so I _do_ need to actually know what I am doing, sooner or later! 8-)) The DSL works fine from my Win98 box. That connection uses WinPoET; its documentation is not terribly informative. The messages generated by the PPPoE dachstein are different enuf from the one at the office that I am not sure how to interpret them. I have taken the Verizon-supplied cable from the Win98 box and tried it in both NICs (with reboots). In messages, this appears Bringing up adsl link: .registered device ppp0 pppoe uses obsolete (PF_INET,SOCK_PACKET) ..TIMED OUT I also get the request to add a subnet for eth1 (0.0.0.0) but I thought that might actually be a driver issue, based on what I saw in past posts on this list (my local archives go back to June 09, 2001). The firewall box is a P133 and I bought 2 Linksys NICs for this. Dumb question: I don't have to have TWO tuplip.o drivers do I?? When it is up, there's this: #adsl-start ..TIMED OUT #adsl-status Link is down -- couldn't find interface corresponding to pid 3473 OK- now tell me what I _really_ need to tell ya! 8-)) TIA John John Atkeison [EMAIL PROTECTED] (302) 888-1979 (610) 952-2727 CLIMATE ACTION THEATRE The mission of Climate Action Theatre (CAT) is to educate the public about global climate change through science-based dramatic presentations to groups. CAT encourages audiences to take action to arrest global climate change. To volunteer in ANY capacity, email [EMAIL PROTECTED] or call (610) 952-2727. ___ Leaf-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user
Re: [Leaf-user] Re: Dachstein PPPoE don't know
definatly no modules loaded for your NIC's since you would see some messages about them right before Jan 13 18:43:24 firewall kernel: CSLIP: code copyright 1989 Regents of the University of California Jan 13 18:43:24 firewall kernel: PPP: version 2.3.7 (demand dialling) Jan 13 18:43:24 firewall kernel: PPP line discipline registered. Jan 13 18:43:24 firewall kernel: PPP Deflate Compression module registered Have you tried uncommenting pci-scan and tulip in /etc/modules? .im not sure if this is the proper module for your LinkSys cards but its worth a shot -Kenneth Hadley - Original Message - From: John Atkeison [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Kenneth Hadley [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [LEAF-user] [EMAIL PROTECTED]; John Atkeison [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2002 7:33 PM Subject: Re: [Leaf-user] Re: Dachstein PPPoE don't know I am on [Leaf-user] but I cannot post direcly because of the postmaster account restriction- more on that in a separate email. The NICs are Linksys LNE100TX (v5.1) Linksys LNE100TX (v2) And- #ip addr 1: lo: LOOBACK,UP MTU 3924 qdisc noque 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 global lo 1336: ppp0: POINTTOPOINT,MULTICAST,NOARP mtu 1500 qdisc noop qlen 10 link/ppp From network.conf: eth0_IPADDR=1.1.1.2 eth0_MASKLEN=30 eth0_BROADCAST=+ eth0_DEFAULT_GW=1.1.1.1 eth0_IP_KRNL_LOGMARTIANS=YES eth0_IP_SHARED_MEDIA=NO eth0_BRIDGE=NO eth0_PROXY_ARP=NO eth0_FAIRQ=NO ### eth1_IPADDR=192.168.1.254 eth1_MASKLEN=24 eth1_BROADCAST=+ eth1_IP_SPOOF=YES eth1_IP_KRNL_LOGMARTIANS=YES eth1_IP_SHARED_MEDIA=NO eth1_BRIDGE=NO eth1_PROXY_ARP=NO eth1_FAIRQ=NO ### Heres messages: Jan 13 18:43:24 firewall syslogd 1.3-3#31.slink1: restart. Jan 13 18:43:24 firewall kernel: klogd 1.3-3#31.slink1, log source = /proc/kmsg started. Jan 13 18:43:24 firewall kernel: Cannot find map file. Jan 13 18:43:24 firewall kernel: Loaded 58 symbols from 14 modules. Jan 13 18:43:24 firewall kernel: Linux version 2.2.19-3-LEAF (root@debian) (gcc version 2.7.2.3) #1 Sat Dec 1 12:15:05 CST 2001 Jan 13 18:43:24 firewall kernel: BIOS-provided physical RAM map: Jan 13 18:43:24 firewall kernel: BIOS-e820: 0009fc00 @ (usable) Jan 13 18:43:24 firewall kernel: BIOS-e820: 0400 @ 0009fc00 (usable) Jan 13 18:43:24 firewall kernel: BIOS-e820: 05f0 @ 0010 (usable) Jan 13 18:43:24 firewall kernel: Detected 133638 kHz processor. Jan 13 18:43:24 firewall kernel: Console: colour VGA+ 80x25 Jan 13 18:43:24 firewall kernel: Calibrating delay loop... 266.24 BogoMIPS Jan 13 18:43:24 firewall kernel: Memory: 95180k/98304k available (732k kernel code, 416k reserved, 1232k data, 44k init) Jan 13 18:43:24 firewall kernel: Dentry hash table entries: 16384 (order 5, 128k) Jan 13 18:43:24 firewall kernel: Buffer cache hash table entries: 131072 (order 7, 512k) Jan 13 18:43:24 firewall kernel: Page cache hash table entries: 32768 (order 5, 128k) Jan 13 18:43:24 firewall kernel: CPU: Intel Pentium 75 - 200 stepping 0c Jan 13 18:43:24 firewall kernel: Checking 386/387 coupling... OK, FPU using exception 16 error reporting. Jan 13 18:43:24 firewall kernel: Checking 'hlt' instruction... OK. Jan 13 18:43:24 firewall kernel: Intel Pentium with F0 0F bug - workaround enabled. Jan 13 18:43:24 firewall kernel: POSIX conformance testing by UNIFIX Jan 13 18:43:24 firewall kernel: PCI: PCI BIOS revision 2.10 entry at 0xfb620 Jan 13 18:43:24 firewall kernel: PCI: Using configuration type 1 Jan 13 18:43:24 firewall kernel: PCI: Probing PCI hardware Jan 13 18:43:24 firewall kernel: Linux NET4.0 for Linux 2.2 Jan 13 18:43:24 firewall kernel: Based upon Swansea University Computer Society NET3.039 Jan 13 18:43:24 firewall kernel: NET4: Unix domain sockets 1.0 for Linux NET4.0. Jan 13 18:43:24 firewall kernel: NET4: Linux TCP/IP 1.0 for NET4.0 Jan 13 18:43:24 firewall kernel: IP Protocols: ICMP, UDP, TCP Jan 13 18:43:24 firewall kernel: TCP: Hash tables configured (ehash 131072 bhash 65536) Jan 13 18:43:24 firewall kernel: Initializing RT netlink socket Jan 13 18:43:24 firewall kernel: Starting kswapd v 1.5 Jan 13 18:43:24 firewall kernel: Software Watchdog Timer: 0.05, timer margin: 60 sec Jan 13 18:43:24 firewall kernel: Real Time Clock Driver v1.09 Jan 13 18:43:24 firewall kernel: RAM disk driver initialized: 16 RAM disks of 6144K size Jan 13 18:43:24 firewall kernel: Floppy drive(s): fd0 is 1.44M Jan 13 18:43:24 firewall kernel: FDC 0 is a National Semiconductor PC87306 Jan 13 18:43:24 firewall kernel: RAMDISK: Compressed image found at block 0 Jan 13 18:43:24 firewall kernel: RAMDISK: Uncompressing root archive: done. Jan 13 18:43:24 firewall kernel: RAMDISK: Auto Filesystem - minix: 2048i 6144bk 68fdz(68) 1024zs 2147483647ms Jan 13 18:43:24 firewall kernel: VFS: Mounted root (minix filesystem). Jan 13 18:43:24 firewall kernel: RAMDISK: Extracting root archive
[Leaf-user] Dachstein-CD v1.0.2 as a router only (no firewall)
If having some limited success in getting Dachstein 1.02 to run as just a router between to private networks, 192.168.1.0 and 192.168.2.0, with 192.168.2.0 being a expansion to the 192.168.1.0 network which is just about full. In terms of machines on either network being able to see the other (aka 192.168.1.195 being able to ping 192.168.2.195 and vice versa) I've had no problems, but some protocols are having problems (such as HP JetDirect) with a good example being a Network file server on 192.168.1.0 acting as a print queue server trying to send print jobs to a HP JetDirect printer on the 192.168.2.0 network and while basic information (such as a error) is able to be received back by the Network file server other information sent by JetDirect on ports 1782 and 161. Currently my guess is that the router is blocking such traffic when I saw this message in my logs on Dachstein machine: Packet log: input REJECT eth1 PROTO=17 192.168.1.138:1705 192.168.2.2:161 L=68 S=0x00 I=44714 F=0x T=128 (#3) Packet log: input REJECT eth1 PROTO=17 192.168.1.138:1705 192.168.2.2:161 L=68 S=0x00 I=45121 F=0x T=128 (#3) Packet log: input REJECT eth1 PROTO=17 192.168.1.138:1705 192.168.2.2:161 L=68 S=0x00 I=45643 F=0x T=128 (#3) Packet log: input REJECT eth1 PROTO=17 192.168.1.138:1705 192.168.2.2:161 L=68 S=0x00 I=46042 F=0x T=128 (#3) With 192.168.1.138 being my server and 192.168.2.2 being my printer Also, just as experiment to find out if I even have my network setup correctly I did a quick and dirty test using I think the same configuration with LRP 2.9.8 that I used with Dachstein (as best I could translate the various options) and had no problems access devices on 192.168.2.0 from 192.168.1.0 (which includes JetDirect, which worked fine), but I would much prefer to use Dachstein than a old version of LRP. Some of the options on my Dachstein box: IPFWDING_KERNEL=FILTER_ON IPALWAYSDEFRAG_KERNEL=NO IF_AUTO=eth0 eth1 IF_LIST=$IF_AUTO eth0_IPADDR=192.168.2.1 eth0_MASKLEN=24 eth0_BROADCAST=+ eth1_IPADDR=192.168.1.11 eth1_MASKLEN=24 eth1_BROADCAST=+ eth1_DEFAULT_GW=192.168.1.1 IPFILTER_SWITCH=router EXTERN_IF=eth0 EXTERN_DHCP=NO EXTERN_DYNADDR=NO INTERN_IF=eth1 INTERN_NET=192.168.1.0/24 INTERN_IP=192.168.1.11 MASQ_SWITCH=NO Does anyone have any thoughts on what I might have configured wrong? Thanks! -Kenneth Hadley ___ Leaf-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user
Re: [Leaf-user] Dachstein-CD v1.0.2 as a router only (no firewall)
- Original Message - From: guitarlynn [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Kenneth Hadley [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2002 1:49 PM Subject: Re: [Leaf-user] Dachstein-CD v1.0.2 as a router only (no firewall) On Saturday 12 January 2002 14:52, Kenneth Hadley wrote: If having some limited success in getting Dachstein 1.02 to run as just a router between to private networks, 192.168.1.0 and 192.168.2.0, with 192.168.2.0 being a expansion to the 192.168.1.0 network which is just about full. Some of the options on my Dachstein box: IPFILTER_SWITCH=router Does anyone have any thoughts on what I might have configured wrong? Change IPFILTER_SWITCH=none The router option still has some ip spoofing and RFC blocking, but setting it to none leaves a straight-through router w/o any protection if I understand things right hopefully I do! -- ~Lynn Avants aka Guitarlynn guitarlynn at users.sourceforge.net http://leaf.sourceforge.net If linux isn't the answer, you've probably got the wrong question! I'm guessing the my problems are related to some of the filter's too but unfortunately changing IPFILTER_SWITCH to none completely kills all traffic between 192.168.1.0 and 192.168.2.0 Worth a shot Thanks though! -Kenneth Hadley ___ Leaf-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user
Re: [Leaf-user] Dachstein-CD v1.0.2 as a router only (no firewall)
hrmmmI see what you refering to...and it makes sense... I will give it a shot monday since ive no intention going to work anymore this weekend ;-) Thanks for the tipand I will bounce a message to this list if it works for me -Kenneth Hadley - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Kenneth Hadley [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: guitarlynn [EMAIL PROTECTED]; LEAF-user [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2002 2:57 PM Subject: Re: [Leaf-user] Dachstein-CD v1.0.2 as a router only (no firewall) eth0 on Dachstein will not route private IP addresses without the folloing change, quoted from a recent reply from Charles on a related question: [this behavior is controlled by]The stopMartians () procedure of /etc/ipfilter.conf. You can comment out the private IP blocks in this procedure if you want to send/recieve from reserved private IP addresses on your external interface. HTH, Dan Quoting Kenneth Hadley [EMAIL PROTECTED]: - Original Message - From: guitarlynn [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Kenneth Hadley [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2002 1:49 PM Subject: Re: [Leaf-user] Dachstein-CD v1.0.2 as a router only (no firewall) On Saturday 12 January 2002 14:52, Kenneth Hadley wrote: If having some limited success in getting Dachstein 1.02 to run as just a router between to private networks, 192.168.1.0 and 192.168.2.0, with 192.168.2.0 being a expansion to the 192.168.1.0 network which is just about full. Some of the options on my Dachstein box: IPFILTER_SWITCH=router Does anyone have any thoughts on what I might have configured wrong? Change IPFILTER_SWITCH=none The router option still has some ip spoofing and RFC blocking, but setting it to none leaves a straight-through router w/o any protection if I understand things right hopefully I do! -- ~Lynn Avants aka Guitarlynn guitarlynn at users.sourceforge.net http://leaf.sourceforge.net If linux isn't the answer, you've probably got the wrong question! I'm guessing the my problems are related to some of the filter's too but unfortunately changing IPFILTER_SWITCH to none completely kills all traffic between 192.168.1.0 and 192.168.2.0 Worth a shot Thanks though! -Kenneth Hadley ___ Leaf-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user ___ Leaf-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user ___ Leaf-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user
Re: [Leaf-user] ppp0 not loading in Dachstein
sure as heck is the problem, for some reason the ppp.o file isnt being loaded at boot time 1) make sure that this to your /etc/network.conf: (and the MUST be in the order you see below # Serial Support slhc ppp ppp_deflate bsd_comp 2) make sure slhc.o, ppp.o, ppp_deflate.o, and bsd_comp.o are located in /lib/modules/ If both the above statements are true OR false then redownload and try making a new diskete from the image file, you may have downloaded a bad copy earlier or edit syslinux.cfg on the floppy itself and the variable ramdisk_size=6144 to ramdisk_size=8192 - Original Message - From: CaMiX CaMiX [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2001 7:21 AM Subject: Re: [Leaf-user] ppp0 not loading in Dachstein Ok, well I've made sure that those modules are now loading in /etc/modules but still no dice. I really don't know why it's not connecting now. Is ppp0 supposed to be showing, because it still doesn't show under ifconfig -a? When I ran the debug what caught my eye was at the very end which was: - ioctl(TIOCSETD(PPP)): Invalid argument(22) /usr/sbin/pppd: This system lacks kernel support for PPP. This could be because the PPP kernel module could not be loaded, or because PPP was not included in the kernel configuration. If PPP was included as a module, try `/sbin/modprobe -v ppp'. If that fails, check t - If this is the problem, which I'm sure it is, what could I look at or do to fix it? Here is the whole copy of my debug file just in case: - Sat Dec 22 10:24:22 UTC 2001 Output of uname -a Linux firewall 2.2.19-3-LEAF-RAID #4 Sat Dec 1 17:27:59 CST 2001 i386 unknown - Output of ifconfig -a loLink encap:Local Loopback inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0 UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:3924 Metric:1 RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 Collisions:0 ipsec0Link encap:IPIP Tunnel HWaddr unspec addr:[NONE SET] Mask:[NONE SET] NOARP MTU:0 Metric:1 RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 Collisions:0 ipsec1Link encap:IPIP Tunnel HWaddr unspec addr:[NONE SET] Mask:[NONE SET] NOARP MTU:0 Metric:1 RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 Collisions:0 ipsec2Link encap:IPIP Tunnel HWaddr unspec addr:[NONE SET] Mask:[NONE SET] NOARP MTU:0 Metric:1 RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 Collisions:0 ipsec3Link encap:IPIP Tunnel HWaddr unspec addr:[NONE SET] Mask:[NONE SET] NOARP MTU:0 Metric:1 RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 Collisions:0 brg0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr FE:FD:04:00:5C:EA unspec addr:[NONE SET] Bcast:[NONE SET] Mask:[NONE SET] BROADCAST MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 Collisions:0 eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:81:8F:71:3F:93 unspec addr:[NONE SET] Bcast:[NONE SET] Mask:[NONE SET] UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:480 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 Collisions:0 Interrupt:11 Base address:0xf000 eth1 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:81:8E:F0:11:75 inet addr:192.168.1.254 Bcast:192.168.1.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 Collisions:0 Interrupt:10 Base address:0x1000 - Output of lsmod Module PagesUsed by ip_masq_vdolive 1180 0 (unused) ip_masq_user3708 0 (unused) ip_masq_raudio 2980 0 (unused) ip_masq_quake 1220 0 (unused) ip_masq_portfw 2416 0 (unused) ip_masq_mfw 3196 0 (unused) ip_masq_irc 1924 0 (unused) ip_masq_ftp 3576 0 (unused) ip_masq_cuseeme 964 0 (unused) ip_masq_autofw 2476 0 (unused) natsemi 8440 2 pci-scan2300 0 [natsemi]
[Leaf-user] Re: Dachstein CD v1.0.2 w/PPPoE
Unfourtunatly at this time I know of no work around and I believe Charles Steinkuehler (DachStein's creator) is looking for ways to integrate PPPoE into the network scripts wich would take of this problem, unfourtunatly firwall scripts are out of my leauge in terms of understanding. - Original Message - From: David B. Cook [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Kenneth Hadley [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:38 PM Subject: Dachstein CD v1.0.2 w/PPPoE Kenneth, I'm new to pppoe and am using your implementation on a Dachstein CD v.0.2. I notice from my provider (Bell Sympatico) that they appear to change my IP frequently. The logs appear to be telling me that it was renegotiated twice within 24 hours the other day. Outbound MASQ traffic appears to be OK, but port forwards get lost. I am probably not the first person to have found this. Am I looking for something that is already there or should there be an /etc/init.d/network restart in the /etc/ppp/ip-up.d or something similar? ___ Leaf-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user
Re: [Leaf-user] Dachstein 1.0.2 with PPPoE
If memory serves me (which is very rarely) a 486dlc chip was made by IBM and it was well known during the early 90's (when I got into PC repair) that both the Cyrix and IBM clone 486's where not quiet as cloned as IBM/Cyrix wanted you to believe (same thing as today with the AMD vs. Intel war...but it was a IBM vs. Cyrix vs. AMD vs. Intel war at the time) I think Charles is using the DachStein-Small kernel for the floppy image and in which case its compiled for 486 without FPU compiled into the kernel (which I think a 486DLC had no FPU). If you want to compile a kernel that might work vist Charles's site (http://leaf.sourceforge.net/devel/cstein/files/kernels/Dachstein-small/) and give adding FPU to the kernel a shot or even droping the kernel into 386 w/FPU might help. Or just upgrade to a low end pentium...since a 486 WILL lag after a 1mbit of DSL traffic ( I upgraded at home from a AMD586-133 to a Intel P200MMX (overkill but it was just collecting dust) and it shocked me how quicker my downloads became) -Kenneth Hadley - Original Message - From: Robert Chambers [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Richard Doyle [EMAIL PROTECTED]; leaf [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2001 9:36 PM Subject: Re: [Leaf-user] Dachstein 1.0.2 with PPPoE Must be a newer kernel for Dachstein. The Eigerstein2 beta with PPPoE from Ken ran great on the 486dlc. Richard Doyle wrote: The 486 dlc was an odd beast without an fpu. You need a kernel with built-in 387 emulation. -Richard -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Robert Chambers Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2001 8:22 PM To: leaf Subject: [Leaf-user] Dachstein 1.0.2 with PPPoE Is there a minimum cpu requirement for Dachstein? Since I was using a Windows machine to extract the file and create the floppy disk, I booted the floppy in the Windows machine which is a PII 400 mhz and configured Dachstein for my connection. When I booted my LRP machine with the Dachstein disk it stopped at loading Linux. My Lrp machine is a 486 DLC - 40. I know I know I need to upgrade my LRP at least to a Pentium. Ken Hadley and I have talked about the PPPoE download speed being limited by the speed of the cpu. :-[ Robert Chambers ___ Leaf-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user ___ Leaf-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user
[Leaf-user] Announcement - DachStein PPPoE
Announcement - DachStein PPPoE EigerStein2BETA PPPoE v.0.4 is officially discontinued from the viewpoint of its maintainer (which is me). With the release of DachStein and a combined CDROM/Floppy aproach a new Image is available from my site that contains PPPoE suport based on the DachStein v.1.02 image available at http://leaf.sourceforge.net/devel/cstein/files/diskimages/dachstein/dachstei n-v1.0.2-1680.bin Also for those who whould like to use DachStein v.1.02 CD I have instructions on my web site on how to setup the CD image with PPPoE support (these instructions are how the Diskette image on my site was created) If you would like to use either the DachStein v.1.02 PPPoe Diskette image or would like to read instructions on how to setup PPPoE with the DachStein v.1.02 CD please visit my site. http://leaf.sourceforge.net/devel/khadley/ If anyone has any problems or suggestions please hesitate to email me =) __ Kenneth Hadley LEAF developer [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Leaf-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user
Re: [Leaf-user] Using pppoe
Really depends on your ISP on how long your alowed to keep a leased IP. For example my ISP (Pacific Bell, Monterey PacBell district, California) doesnt change my IP address unless I reboot my router and even then I have a 50-50 chance of receiving the same IP address as before, but I know of other ISP's (mostly European it seams) forceably change your IP address every few hours (I had the same IP once for 3 months and the only reason it changed was because the entire house lost power). Dachstein and EigerSteinBETA2 PPPoE v.0.4 both support non-demand dial PPPoE so you should be able to keep a fairly static IP address, providing you dont have a over agressive ISP. - Original Message - From: Keith Laidlaw [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: LEAF [EMAIL PROTECTED]; FreeS/Wan [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, December 09, 2001 12:54 PM Subject: [Leaf-user] Using pppoe I have had cable access (using DHCP) for a year and my IP address has changed only once. This is very convenient, considering I often access my home network from a RW. I don't need DNS to resolve the address, I hard code it. I now have to use ADSL access using PPPoE and dynamic address. My question is: are PPPoE addresses as stable? Is there the equivalent of a lease. Is there a trick I can use to keep the address (e.g. ping some address once a minute)? Is there another way that I can tolerate changing addresses by reresolving the address (dynamic DNS???). TIA Keith Laidlaw Manager of Engineering Dakins Engineering Group Ltd. tel: (905) 814-6024 fax: (905) 814-6029 ___ Leaf-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user
Re: [Leaf-user] Dachstein features: Floppy vs CD
- Original Message - From: Charles Steinkuehler [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2001 11:14 AM Subject: [Leaf-user] Dachstein features: Floppy vs CD I'm hoping to get time in the near future to make a release version of the floppy-based Dachstein firewall. I am already planning on porting some of the CD features (like support for pkgpath.cfg and lrpkg.cfg files) to the floppy version, but I'm also strongly considering migrating the new backup scripts to the floppy version as well. While the support for partial backups is not nearly so critical when running from floppy as when running from CD, it might be a useful feature in some situations, and the new backup scripts support all features of the previous scripts, so no functionality is lost. The big advantage is consistency across the floppy and CD release, making it easier to develop and maintain. The main drawback is the potential for the new scripts to be confusing to a new user, and the fact that much existing documentation will not properly reflect the new backup mechanisms. I have used LRP since 2.9.4 was released, so my opinion are of someone who (thinks he) knows what he is talking about. Untill LEAF develops a GUI interface (not likely) I would hazard to guess that to ANY new user LEAF will seam a bit confusing. My opinion, merge the floppy and CD scripts together, since this would seam to alow new versions of Dachstein (and any future versions) to be relased as a media neatural system (there is more than one persion on this list that uses Flash, CDROM, diskette, LS-120, ZIP, and Hard Disk). This also reduces version support since tech support would based on Dachstein v.x.x.x instead of Dachstein v.x.x.x (Media). I'd like to hear from anyone who's used a recent Dachstein CD release and a previous floppy release. I'm specifically interested in how confusing (or intuitive) you found the backup routines, and any thoughts or concerns you might have about making the CD backup routines the 'standard issue' for all flavors of Dachstein. Changing the destination on Dachstein CD through me for a loop at first (untill I relized it was trying to backup to a CD) since I was used to Eigerstein2BETA, but beyond that, I would like to just see some documentation (the bane of Open Source Projects) since im still fuzzy about the backup options. Charles Steinkuehler http://lrp.steinkuehler.net http://c0wz.steinkuehler.net (lrp.c0wz.com mirror) ___ Leaf-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user
Re: [Leaf-user] Comparison between LRP and the hub/router
One thing a LEAF firewall has over a SOHO firewall (Such as netgear, linksys, etc) is the ability to add packages such as DNS, web server, intrusion detection, and my personal favorite, the Socks5 proxy for the ever so troublesome but always useful, ICQ instant messenger (which ive yet to hear of anyone being able to receive files when firewalled with a SOHO unit). It really depends on what the user needs, because in really simple cases (AKA...home user with a few PC's) I usually recommend a Linksys unit. For anyone who needs anything more advanced I recommend and usually setup a LEAF firewall. -Kenneth Hadley - Original Message - From: Binh Do [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2001 9:33 AM Subject: [Leaf-user] Comparison between LRP and the hub/router I have the official release (v1.0.1) of Dachstein-CD up over the weekend and was very very excited about it. Thanks, Charles. I convinced a couple of friends to use LRP (usually 1-floppy) but some said they prefer a ready hub/router in home environment (3-4 computers) because: + price: a Linksys hub/router costs around $110 Canadian dollars. If you have to go and buy a complete LRP box (2 NICs, a hub, a computer box with 16M), it costs more than that unless you go to used-computer shop and not everyone knows howto. + job done: the hub/router could also do NAT, IPSEC, PPPOE and DMZ. + setup: definitely hub/router is easier than LRP I have never used the hub/router and so do not have any experience about that. What are your comments? ___ Leaf-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user
Re: [Leaf-user] Comparison between LRP and the hub/router
Are you using a older version of ICQ ...such as 2000a? the included masq module in my pppoe image works just fine with the older version of ICQ, but not the new versions of ICQ. Unless ICQ is planning on proving me wrong today ;-) - Original Message - From: Robert Chambers [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Kenneth Hadley [EMAIL PROTECTED]; leaf [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2001 1:43 PM Subject: Re: [Leaf-user] Comparison between LRP and the hub/router Ken: Using your Eigerstein beta2 pppoe beta v.0.4 I have had no problems with ICQ. Nor did I have to do anything diiferent with the set up of ICQ to get it to work. Robert Chambers Kenneth Hadley wrote: One thing a LEAF firewall has over a SOHO firewall (Such as netgear, linksys, etc) is the ability to add packages such as DNS, web server, intrusion detection, and my personal favorite, the Socks5 proxy for the ever so troublesome but always useful, ICQ instant messenger (which ive yet to hear of anyone being able to receive files when firewalled with a SOHO unit). It really depends on what the user needs, because in really simple cases (AKA...home user with a few PC's) I usually recommend a Linksys unit. For anyone who needs anything more advanced I recommend and usually setup a LEAF firewall. -Kenneth Hadley - Original Message - From: Binh Do [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2001 9:33 AM Subject: [Leaf-user] Comparison between LRP and the hub/router I have the official release (v1.0.1) of Dachstein-CD up over the weekend and was very very excited about it. Thanks, Charles. I convinced a couple of friends to use LRP (usually 1-floppy) but some said they prefer a ready hub/router in home environment (3-4 computers) because: + price: a Linksys hub/router costs around $110 Canadian dollars. If you have to go and buy a complete LRP box (2 NICs, a hub, a computer box with 16M), it costs more than that unless you go to used-computer shop and not everyone knows howto. + job done: the hub/router could also do NAT, IPSEC, PPPOE and DMZ. + setup: definitely hub/router is easier than LRP I have never used the hub/router and so do not have any experience about that. What are your comments? ___ Leaf-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user ___ Leaf-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user
Re: [Leaf-user] Hardware requirements ;-)
Unfourtunatly from my tests a 486DX4-100 is the minium speed CPU needed for PPPoE if your bandwidth is the standard 1.5mbit down/ 128kbit up and even with this CPU you will see your bandwidth go down the toilet with more clients behind the LEAF box. Obviously if you have a slower line then you dont need that kind of power, say a 486sx25 if you have a 768k down/??k up. The newer Roaring Penguin PPPoE clients might be less CPU intensive but unfourtunatly you need Glibc 2.2 to compile it, and ive found no way around this (Hint: If someone can prove me wrong I would be most gratefull) which has kinda halted images from me till Dachstein is released. -Kenneth Hadley - Original Message - From: Robert Chambers [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: leaf-user [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2001 12:42 AM Subject: Re: [Leaf-user] Hardware requirements ;-) Yes there is a limit on how slow of a processor one can use with an LRP. I am using Eigerstien2beta pppoe beta v.0.4 from Kenneth Hadley on a 386 DX board running a Cyrix 486 DLC 40 mhz chip and the PPPoE is limited to about 500kbps down load. The speed limit has to do with the way pppoe sends the packets, the processor must recombine them. Also according to Ken Hadley on anything less than a 486 DX4 100mhz you will notice a speed dive with PPPoE. Robert Chambers Jeff Newmiller wrote: On Sat, 13 Oct 2001, Mark Plowman wrote: I have recently been encouraging my less Linux-centric colleagues to use LEAF as a fire-wall for their personal dial-up/cable/ADSL Internet connections, having done the same with the company ISDN and ADSL connections. Yesterday the trainee expressed interest, explained that he had cable access and asked about the hardware requirements. I explained that almost anything he could lay his hands on would be sufficient and he then asked but wouldn't that (a 386) perform *too* slowly?. I reassured him that that would be OK and sent him off after an introductory talk about LEAF with both an Eigerstien and a Dachstein floppy. Once at home I decided to put my money where my mouth was and *downgraded* my 486 DX2-80 with a 386 SX-33! I had to (of course) replace the kernel on my ISDN Eigerstien with a non-FPU example, but it all works a treat! What I do notice is that during start-up the unpacking of the Linux Kernel and initial ram disk images take an *age*! I found that there is a lower limit... the performance of a 386-33 on a pppoe setup was significantly lower than no router. However, for static routing it should be okay, and almost any true 486 should keep up with pppoe. --- Jeff NewmillerThe . . Go Live... DCN:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Basics: ##.#. ##.#. Live Go... Live: OO#.. Dead: OO#.. Playing Research Engineer (Solar/BatteriesO.O#. #.O#. with /Software/Embedded Controllers) .OO#. .OO#. rocks...2k --- ___ Leaf-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user ___ Leaf-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user
Re: [Leaf-user] Eigerstein/Netmeeting
Well the module on my site does say that it will work on kernel 2.2.16 so it should work fine I do suggest you look at the home website for the module ( http://www.coritel.it/coritel/ip/sofia/nat/nat2/nat2.htm ) to learn what ports you need to forward for h.323 -Kenneth Hadley - Original Message - From: Edward Arthur [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2001 7:53 PM Subject: [Leaf-user] Eigerstein/Netmeeting Hi, I'm running Eigerstein (kernel version 2.2.16) and want to get Netmeeting going. I've rummaged through the archives and they point to a file called ip_masq_h3231.o but: 1.) George Toft's site (http://www.georgetoft.com/linux/) says It works, however, only with 2.0 kernels 2.) Keith Hadleys's site (http://leaf.sourceforge.net/devel/khadley/packages.html) says Unless otherwise specified all modules are compiled to Linux Kernel 2.2.16... H.323 Masq Module ( Home Site ) v.2.2.0 So where do I find one for 2.2.16 or should I just try them? Or is there something better to use than Netmeeting (which I can convince my brother-in-law to use? :-) Thanks, /Ed ___ Leaf-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user ___ Leaf-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user
Re: [Leaf-user] Re: LRP PPPoE
with top I will send you a top.lrp package if you wish to test your CPU usage..my tests are subjective untill I get more data Kenneth Hadley PC / Network Specialist McCormick Selph Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: Mika Kouhia [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 29, 2001 9:07 AM Subject: Re: [Leaf-user] Re: LRP PPPoE causes a 486 computer to bog down and not be able to handle the DSL connection with speeds over 500k. How have you been monitoring the CPU usage? With top or something else? I have been running your pppoe-image now for a couple of weeks, my connection is rated 1.5M/512k, but I have been able to get only something like 800k/400k out of it. Anyway, my LRP-machine is 486DX2-66 with 32M and it does not seem to be having any problems with that kind of traffic. But then, without means to actually measure the CPU load I would not probably knew even if it was having problems... /mek ___ Leaf-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user ___ Leaf-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user
[Leaf-user] Re: pppoe
- Original Message - From: Liam Tumulty [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 22, 2001 2:54 AM Subject: pppoe Hi, I'm putting together a linux router and got your image up and running (thanks), but would like to use some of the features in the new EigerStein Pre/release. Not at the moment, since I'm waiting for a final release, but if that doesnt happen by the end of next month then I will release a image based on the most recent Pre-release Your disk throws an error with pppoe saying that inetd is out of date. The new release seems to erase pppoe.lrp after this error. ??? Ive never seen this error, are you trying to use rp-pppoe v.3.0? I'm still working out merging your pppoe into this new release, but was wondering if you had any plans for compiling a RP-pppoe 3.0 based package? yes, it would be part of the next image I will release Also, do you have a list of what other changes from the standard EigerStein distribution (if any) you made? The Image is based on EigerStein2BETA, and as for the changes to tell you the truth ive completly forgotton, but if you like I could find out. Thanks for your help, -Liam No prob, -Kenneth Hadley ___ Leaf-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user
