Re: Subject: sendmail + masq/ipfw solutions for multi-user system?
"James S. Kaplan KG7FU" wrote: This message only turned up here today, no idea where it has been for two weeks. > Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't address groups such as 192.168 and 44.0 > considered "private" nets and technically aren't supposed to be routed via > internet? Even if they were, the ampr.org docs clearly state that 44.26.1.0 is > for "testing" and is not to be assigned. AND, why does the rest of the world > know to route 44.26.1.0 to ucsd.edu/ampr.org, yet ampr.org doesn't have it? > My local net just happens to be 44.26.1see what the problem is now? The 44 network is most certainly not a private network. The reason 44.16.1.0 is routed to the 'ampr.org' host is because the *whole* 44 network is routed to the ampr.org host, it is the gateway for net 44 to the net. ampr.org doesn't know how to route to 44.16.1.0 for specifically the reason you've stated, it is reserved for test purposes and therefore should not be routable. > Like I've been saying, I'm neither a programmer nor a seasoned net > professional. As such, I need a bit more "1-2-3..." guidance than some > of you. I'm sure by the posts I see here that there are many more "Linux > Newbies", new hams, hams new to packet and just plain old dumb hams like myself > that would be more inclined to get heavily into ax.25 networking, instead of > turned off, if it weren't for the lack of simplistic docs and negative > responses from a few vocal, but harsh, hams-in-the-know. The harsh reality is that it is extremely difficult to have both flexibility/capability and simplicity. It's just not possible to get by without knowing at least something about what you are doing, unless you get someone to do it for you. > I have the greatest respect and admiration for all the programmers and > individuals who have made Linux what it is. I'm continually bafflled by the > responses some programmers and "experts" give to reasonable questions from > folks who don't quite have the same level of understanding, experience or > education as they. Don't be baffled. There is no mystery. You've made the mistake of assuming the things you are asking are easy and straightforward things to do. Terry
Re: Subject: sendmail + masq/ipfw solutions for multi-user system?
On Sun, 23 Jan 2000, Terry Dawson wrote about, Re: Subject: sendmail + masq/ipfw solutions for multi-user system?: > Richard Adams wrote: > > > > define(`confBIND_OPTS',`-DNSRCH -DEFNAMES')dnl > > > > And where is one supposed to find that define ?? > > Richard, > It goes in your sendmail M4 configuration file. In Debian it is called > /etc/mail/sendmail.mc. Thanks, i did dig into it and found it. However i find it much easier just to recompile sendmail without dns. > Terry -- Regards Richard [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://people.zeelandnet.nl/pa3gcu/
Re: Subject: sendmail + masq/ipfw solutions for multi-user system?
Richard Adams wrote: > > define(`confBIND_OPTS',`-DNSRCH -DEFNAMES')dnl > > And where is one supposed to find that define ?? Richard, It goes in your sendmail M4 configuration file. In Debian it is called /etc/mail/sendmail.mc. Terry
Re: Subject: sendmail + masq/ipfw solutions for multi-user system?
On Sat, 22 Jan 2000, Alexandre Fornieles wrote about, Re: Subject: sendmail + masq/ipfw solutions for multi-user system?: > Hi Richard and the list, > > As i don't (and think i won't) use sendmail myself anymore i won't be > able to test this option but i see no reason why it would fail to work. > At least after this information was gave on the list > (http://www.debian.org/Lists-Archives/debian-french-9912/msg00422.html) > no one complained about it. I dont suppose French speaking people would, they would understand the message ;-) I presume it is a "Build option" anyway i will stick to define NAMED_BIND 0 -- Regards Richard [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://people.zeelandnet.nl/pa3gcu/
Re: Subject: sendmail + masq/ipfw solutions for multi-user system?
On Fri, 21 Jan 2000, you wrote: > On Fri, Jan 21, 2000 at 07:47:30AM +, Robin Gilks wrote: > > On Thu, 20 Jan 2000, you wrote: > > > I'd like to keep the amprnet and internet operations completely > > > separated. > > > [snip] > > If you or anyone else is interested further, I can post some of the (smaller) > > configuration files for Exim and bind to assist in their setup > > > > Actually, wb2yxy has some suggestions which led me to look at the > ampr.org.rev file on ucsd. This has the same format as the db files > and I would think that renaming it to db.44 (and referencing it in > named.conf should work, although I haven't tried it. > > Pine has a configuration option to relay all mail to a specific host, > which bypasses the MTA altogether. I did use this at one time to > handle amprnet traffic, but it was also a kludge, of course. This also > required me to use separate login names for amprnet and internet mail. > Hi again Bob I've put all my DNS files on my web site (see sig) along with the (modded) Perl script from Simon Mudd that munges things to change the SOA and NS so I run as a master server (which also helps to stop referals to the diald link). It still does live lookups of non-ampr.org hosts using the dialup. I'll put the Exim and masquerade stuff on there as well if required - days are too short at this time of year (got this urge to hibernate!!). -- 73 de Robin. G8ECJ Hub manager gb7ipd NTS: G8ECJ@GB7TVG.#42.GBR.EUAmprNet: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.gb7ipd.freeserve.co.uk/ Shack: (+44) 1628 533311Fax: (+44) 1628 850165 Club pages (g4xyw modem etc) at http://www.tvipug.freeserve.co.uk
Re: Subject: sendmail + masq/ipfw solutions for multi-user system?
On 20 Jan, Bob Nielsen wrote: > The machine I have was using diald and every time I sent smtp to another > 44 station, it dialed up my ISP to do a DNS lookup, even though I am > routing 44 traffic out my radio port. /etc/hosts works fine for > telnet, ftp, etc., but not smtp (at least I haven't found a way to do > this.) I have run JNOS a bit, and have pointed 'dns nameserver' to a > DNS via the local gateway, but if I run kernel AX.25 I don't know how > to use a different DNS for ampr.org than I use for everything else. Ok. that makes sense, I guess. > I was thinking that running a 'cache-only nameserver' with a local > zone file for 44.xxx might work for this application. As an > alternative, is there a way to configure sendmail (or exim, postfix, > qmail, etc.) to look at /etc/hosts first before trying a DNS lookup? It certainly should be possible to configure sendmail to consider /etc/hosts before attempting a DNS lookup. What does the 'hosts' entry in your /etc/nsswitch.conf look like? To have name lookups check /etc/hosts before dns it should look like: # /etc/nsswitch.conf hosts: files dns You do have the hosts specified in /etc/hosts with their fully qualifed domain name don't you? and you do have ampr.org in your /etc/resolv.conf 'search' list I presume? e.g. # /etc/resolv.conf search ampr.org your.domain regards Terry -- [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Subject: sendmail + masq/ipfw solutions for multi-user system?
Hi Richard and the list, As i don't (and think i won't) use sendmail myself anymore i won't be able to test this option but i see no reason why it would fail to work. At least after this information was gave on the list (http://www.debian.org/Lists-Archives/debian-french-9912/msg00422.html) no one complained about it. Richard Adams wrote: > > And where is one supposed to find that define ?? > > I cant find it in any dorectory in the src dor from the sendmail source. > Anyway it seems rather a strange define. > Please elaborate.??. I can't say much more but i remind several cases where i found sendmail directives (for mc files) mentionned in third party docs that i could never read about on the official documents shipped with the source code... this could be one of those. Good luck. Alex. -- Alexandre Fornieles | F-40150 Hossegor (France) ICQ : 1519880 | Debian GNU/Linux 2.2.14 i686 - Software is like sex : It's better when it's Free !
Re: Subject: sendmail + masq/ipfw solutions for multi-user system?
Hello, Richard Adams wrote: > > > Hi Bob > > Sounds to me as though you have exactly the setup I have and suffering the same > > problems with sendmail - I never managed to stop it forcing a dialup for DNS > > resolution even though I had the full ampr.org DNS domain loaded on the local > > DNS. > > One possable solution to the DNS problem could be compiling sendmail > yourself with > define NAMED_BIND0 > in conf.h > > As to it being an overal solution raises possably more questions than > answers. This has been discussed in the debian-french list a few weeks ago and the "clean" solution that was suggested as per the docs was to use this statement in your mc files : define(`confBIND_OPTS',`-DNSRCH -DEFNAMES')dnl This should prevent sendmail from doing dns lookups. I haven't tried it myself as i just switched to exim a few days ago and only have very standard dial-up needs here. So good luck. Cheers, Alex. -- Alexandre Fornieles | F-40150 Hossegor (France) ICQ : 1519880 | Debian GNU/Linux 2.2.14 i686 - Software is like sex : It's better when it's Free !
Re: Subject: sendmail + masq/ipfw solutions for multi-user system?
On Fri, 21 Jan 2000, Alexandre Fornieles wrote about, Re: Subject: sendmail + masq/ipfw solutions for multi-user system?: > Hello, > > Richard Adams wrote: > > > > > Hi Bob > > > Sounds to me as though you have exactly the setup I have and suffering the same > > > problems with sendmail - I never managed to stop it forcing a dialup for DNS > > > resolution even though I had the full ampr.org DNS domain loaded on the local > > > DNS. > > > > One possable solution to the DNS problem could be compiling sendmail > > yourself with > > define NAMED_BIND0 > > in conf.h > > > > As to it being an overal solution raises possably more questions than > > answers. > > This has been discussed in the debian-french list a few weeks ago and > the "clean" solution that was suggested as per the docs was to use this > statement in your mc files : > > define(`confBIND_OPTS',`-DNSRCH -DEFNAMES')dnl And where is one supposed to find that define ?? I cant find it in any dorectory in the src dor from the sendmail source. Anyway it seems rather a strange define. Please elaborate.??. > This should prevent sendmail from doing dns lookups. > I haven't tried it myself as i just switched to exim a few days ago and > only have very standard dial-up needs here. > > So good luck. > > Cheers, Alex. > > -- > Alexandre Fornieles | F-40150 Hossegor (France) > ICQ : 1519880 | Debian GNU/Linux 2.2.14 i686 > - > Software is like sex : It's better when it's Free ! -- Regards Richard [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://people.zeelandnet.nl/pa3gcu/
Re: Subject: sendmail + masq/ipfw solutions for multi-user system?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Nielsen) writes: > I was thinking that running a 'cache-only nameserver' with a local > zone file for 44.xxx might work for this application. As an > alternative, is there a way to configure sendmail (or exim, postfix, > qmail, etc.) to look at /etc/hosts first before trying a DNS lookup? postfix can have dns lookups disabled. Probably for the .ampr.org domain you can simply use a "transport" entry which looks like: ampr.org:server # route through mx of server # ampr.org domain only .ampr.org :server # route through mx of server # ampr.org and subdomains ampr.org:[server] # no dns lookups on server # direct to ip of server You can also send to a different port other than smtp (if required), or if necessery use the pipe transport which allows you to send the message to an arbitrary command for execution. (ie you don't need to use smtp). Postfix has lots of other goodies too. The other mailers probably allow similar things, and sendmail is more flexible if you can work out how to configure it :-) Simon -- Simon J Mudd, Madrid SPAINTel: +34-91-408 4878email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Subject: sendmail + masq/ipfw solutions for multi-user system?
On Fri, Jan 21, 2000 at 07:47:30AM +, Robin Gilks wrote: > On Thu, 20 Jan 2000, you wrote: > > I'd like to keep the amprnet and internet operations completely > > separated. > > > > The machine I have was using diald and every time I sent smtp to another > > 44 station, it dialed up my ISP to do a DNS lookup, even though I am > > routing 44 traffic out my radio port. /etc/hosts works fine for > > telnet, ftp, etc., but not smtp (at least I haven't found a way to do > > this.) I have run JNOS a bit, and have pointed 'dns nameserver' to a > > DNS via the local gateway, but if I run kernel AX.25 I don't know how > > to use a different DNS for ampr.org than I use for everything else. > > > > I was thinking that running a 'cache-only nameserver' with a local > > zone file for 44.xxx might work for this application. As an > > alternative, is there a way to configure sendmail (or exim, postfix, > > qmail, etc.) to look at /etc/hosts first before trying a DNS lookup? > > > Hi Bob > Sounds to me as though you have exactly the setup I have and suffering the same > problems with sendmail - I never managed to stop it forcing a dialup for DNS > resolution even though I had the full ampr.org DNS domain loaded on the local > DNS. > > I switched to Exim which now also allows a 'psuedo hopper' facility for those > stations without MX records that are reachable locally. smtp hopper will be > familiar to *NOS users - its a kludge to relay smtp to the next station (ie > gateway) in the IP route to the desitination The effect can be duplicated in > Exim by either using an external director program or by using the new > translate_ip_address feature. > > If you or anyone else is interested further, I can post some of the (smaller) > configuration files for Exim and bind to assist in their setup > Actually, wb2yxy has some suggestions which led me to look at the ampr.org.rev file on ucsd. This has the same format as the db files and I would think that renaming it to db.44 (and referencing it in named.conf should work, although I haven't tried it. Pine has a configuration option to relay all mail to a specific host, which bypasses the MTA altogether. I did use this at one time to handle amprnet traffic, but it was also a kludge, of course. This also required me to use separate login names for amprnet and internet mail. Bob, N7XY -- Bob Nielsen, N7XY (ex-W6SWE) (RN2)[EMAIL PROTECTED] Tucson, AZ DM42nh QRP-L #1985 http://www.primenet.com/~nielsen
Re: Subject: sendmail + masq/ipfw solutions for multi-user system?
On Fri, 21 Jan 2000, Robin Gilks wrote about, Re: Subject: sendmail + masq/ipfw solutions for multi-user system?: > On Thu, 20 Jan 2000, you wrote: > > I'd like to keep the amprnet and internet operations completely > > separated. > > > > The machine I have was using diald and every time I sent smtp to another > > 44 station, it dialed up my ISP to do a DNS lookup, even though I am > > routing 44 traffic out my radio port. /etc/hosts works fine for > > telnet, ftp, etc., but not smtp (at least I haven't found a way to do > > this.) I have run JNOS a bit, and have pointed 'dns nameserver' to a > > DNS via the local gateway, but if I run kernel AX.25 I don't know how > > to use a different DNS for ampr.org than I use for everything else. > > > > I was thinking that running a 'cache-only nameserver' with a local > > zone file for 44.xxx might work for this application. As an > > alternative, is there a way to configure sendmail (or exim, postfix, > > qmail, etc.) to look at /etc/hosts first before trying a DNS lookup? > > > Hi Bob > Sounds to me as though you have exactly the setup I have and suffering the same > problems with sendmail - I never managed to stop it forcing a dialup for DNS > resolution even though I had the full ampr.org DNS domain loaded on the local > DNS. One possable solution to the DNS problem could be compiling sendmail yourself with define NAMED_BIND0 in conf.h As to it being an overal solution raises possably more questions than answers. > I switched to Exim which now also allows a 'psuedo hopper' facility for those > stations without MX records that are reachable locally. smtp hopper will be > familiar to *NOS users - its a kludge to relay smtp to the next station (ie > gateway) in the IP route to the desitination The effect can be duplicated in > Exim by either using an external director program or by using the new > translate_ip_address feature. > > If you or anyone else is interested further, I can post some of the (smaller) > configuration files for Exim and bind to assist in their setup > > -- > > 73 de Robin. G8ECJ Hub manager gb7ipd > > NTS: G8ECJ@GB7TVG.#42.GBR.EUAmprNet: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.gb7ipd.freeserve.co.uk/ > Shack: (+44) 1628 533311Fax: (+44) 1628 850165 > Club pages (g4xyw modem etc) at http://www.tvipug.freeserve.co.uk -- Regards Richard [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://people.zeelandnet.nl/pa3gcu/
HOWTO ax.25 + firewall [Was Re: Subject: sendmail + masq/ipfw solutions for multi-user system?]
Thanks for all the great replies on sendmail and DNS! I have some direction now, but still am confused about how to configure my lan vs. my ampernet. First, my lan is already working well, using 2.0.36 + ipfwadm + masq and 192.168.x.x addresses. We use a dial-on-demand ppp connection, bit it is usually up 24 hours a day. I could leave it this way or change to 2.2.x like my other Linux boxes on the lan. So, do I re-address all the workstations to 44.26.x.x and continue to run as normal? Do I use ip alising and give the ax.25 boxes secondary or prinmary 192.168 addresses? Do I use ipip and create dummy devices? Do I add a 2n nic to the firewall and route 44.26.x.x differently than 192.168.x.x? Second, I'd like sendmail or whatever MTA I end up with being able to handle connections to the internet as well as smtp via radio without too much effort. My guess is the key would be to decide first which scheme to use above. Thanks, - James S. Kaplan KG7FU Eugene Oregon USA [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.rio.com/~kg7fu ICQ # 1227639 Have YOU tried Linux today? -
Re: Subject: sendmail + masq/ipfw solutions for multi-user system?
On Thu, 20 Jan 2000, you wrote: > I'd like to keep the amprnet and internet operations completely > separated. > > The machine I have was using diald and every time I sent smtp to another > 44 station, it dialed up my ISP to do a DNS lookup, even though I am > routing 44 traffic out my radio port. /etc/hosts works fine for > telnet, ftp, etc., but not smtp (at least I haven't found a way to do > this.) I have run JNOS a bit, and have pointed 'dns nameserver' to a > DNS via the local gateway, but if I run kernel AX.25 I don't know how > to use a different DNS for ampr.org than I use for everything else. > > I was thinking that running a 'cache-only nameserver' with a local > zone file for 44.xxx might work for this application. As an > alternative, is there a way to configure sendmail (or exim, postfix, > qmail, etc.) to look at /etc/hosts first before trying a DNS lookup? > Hi Bob Sounds to me as though you have exactly the setup I have and suffering the same problems with sendmail - I never managed to stop it forcing a dialup for DNS resolution even though I had the full ampr.org DNS domain loaded on the local DNS. I switched to Exim which now also allows a 'psuedo hopper' facility for those stations without MX records that are reachable locally. smtp hopper will be familiar to *NOS users - its a kludge to relay smtp to the next station (ie gateway) in the IP route to the desitination The effect can be duplicated in Exim by either using an external director program or by using the new translate_ip_address feature. If you or anyone else is interested further, I can post some of the (smaller) configuration files for Exim and bind to assist in their setup -- 73 de Robin. G8ECJ Hub manager gb7ipd NTS: G8ECJ@GB7TVG.#42.GBR.EUAmprNet: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.gb7ipd.freeserve.co.uk/ Shack: (+44) 1628 533311Fax: (+44) 1628 850165 Club pages (g4xyw modem etc) at http://www.tvipug.freeserve.co.uk
Re: Subject: sendmail + masq/ipfw solutions for multi-user system?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ("Robert A Jenkins") writes:
> I can't help much re. you Mailer problems, I do use sendmail on machines
> with multiple delivery options but it is a real pain to set up. Having seen
> Exim mentioned in this group, I will be looking at that...
Another option which few people are aware of is postfix (see www.postfix.org)
this is a reasonably new MTA which performs very well, and whose configuration
is much simpler than sendmail. It's intended to be a "sendmail" replacement.
Simon
--
Simon J Mudd, Madrid SPAINTel: +34-91-408 4878email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Subject: sendmail + masq/ipfw solutions for multi-user system?
On 18 Jan, Bob Nielsen wrote: > Has anyone come up with a method to convert the ampr.org listings from > ftp.ucsd.edu to a proper format to use with bind (which appears to me > to be more difficult to set up than sendmail?) I'm looking for a > solution which could be used on a system not connected full-time to the > Internet. I just bought the O'Reilly bind book, but haven't > figured this one out yet. I assume I need to create a db.44 file. Bob, I think it'd help if you described precisely what it is that you are trying to achieve. That way we can advise you on the best course of action. You talk about needing this for a machine that isn't permanently connected to the net .. ok .. but why would a machine not permanently connected to the net require a complete ampr.org zone file? What are you able to actually reach via amprnet? Will this machine act as a DNS to other hosts, or do you want this capability just so this machine can resolve the addresses for itself? Terry -- [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Subject: sendmail + masq/ipfw solutions for multi-user system?
On Thu, Jan 20, 2000 at 10:01:36PM +1100, Terry Dawson wrote: > On 18 Jan, Bob Nielsen wrote: > > > Has anyone come up with a method to convert the ampr.org listings from > > ftp.ucsd.edu to a proper format to use with bind (which appears to me > > to be more difficult to set up than sendmail?) I'm looking for a > > solution which could be used on a system not connected full-time to the > > Internet. I just bought the O'Reilly bind book, but haven't > > figured this one out yet. I assume I need to create a db.44 file. > > Bob, > I think it'd help if you described precisely what it is that you are > trying to achieve. That way we can advise you on the best course of > action. > > You talk about needing this for a machine that isn't permanently > connected to the net .. ok .. but why would a machine not permanently > connected to the net require a complete ampr.org zone file? What are > you able to actually reach via amprnet? > > Will this machine act as a DNS to other hosts, or do you want this > capability just so this machine can resolve the addresses for itself? Terry, I'd like to keep the amprnet and internet operations completely separated. The machine I have was using diald and every time I sent smtp to another 44 station, it dialed up my ISP to do a DNS lookup, even though I am routing 44 traffic out my radio port. /etc/hosts works fine for telnet, ftp, etc., but not smtp (at least I haven't found a way to do this.) I have run JNOS a bit, and have pointed 'dns nameserver' to a DNS via the local gateway, but if I run kernel AX.25 I don't know how to use a different DNS for ampr.org than I use for everything else. I was thinking that running a 'cache-only nameserver' with a local zone file for 44.xxx might work for this application. As an alternative, is there a way to configure sendmail (or exim, postfix, qmail, etc.) to look at /etc/hosts first before trying a DNS lookup? Bob -- Bob Nielsen, N7XY (ex-W6SWE) (RN2)[EMAIL PROTECTED] Tucson, AZ DM42nh QRP-L #1985 http://www.primenet.com/~nielsen
RE: Subject: sendmail + masq/ipfw solutions for multi-user system?
Hi James, I can't help much re. you Mailer problems, I do use sendmail on machines with multiple delivery options but it is a real pain to set up. Having seen Exim mentioned in this group, I will be looking at that... Re DNS, I can let you have a copy of my files, I have a DNS on my system that replies directly with data on local systems and uses forwarding to my ISP for unknown addresses. The files are in Bind 8.x format - RedHat 5.2 or later. Is this OK for your setup? Regards, Tony Jenkins, G8TBF / G0WTK.
Re: Subject: sendmail + masq/ipfw solutions for multi-user system?
Take a look on my web site - I've hacked the Perl script from SImon Mudd to extract the subset of ampr.org with a netmask of 255.0.0.0 - ie. all of it. This excellent program removes all the trash that bind barfs overs and warns about all the other errors - a minor tweak can then be made to filter out these 'errors' as well. >From the ampr.org file downloaded from ucsd every night, it creates full.ampr.org and full.ampr.org.rev On Tue, 18 Jan 2000, you wrote: > > Has anyone come up with a method to convert the ampr.org listings from > ftp.ucsd.edu to a proper format to use with bind (which appears to me > to be more difficult to set up than sendmail?) I'm looking for a > solution which could be used on a system not connected full-time to the > Internet. I just bought the O'Reilly bind book, but haven't > figured this one out yet. I assume I need to create a db.44 file. > > Bob > -- 73 de Robin. G8ECJ Hub manager gb7ipd NTS: G8ECJ@GB7TVG.#42.GBR.EUAmprNet: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.gb7ipd.freeserve.co.uk/ Shack: (+44) 1628 533311Fax: (+44) 1628 850165 Club pages (g4xyw modem etc) at http://www.tvipug.freeserve.co.uk
Re: Subject: sendmail + masq/ipfw solutions for multi-user system?
"James S. Kaplan" wrote: > As the available tools for Linux Hams increases, so does the > complexity of the > system..! > > I am running several Linux pc's for a variety of services, some ax.25 > and some supporting > our lan (firewall, etc.). I need to consolidate two of the servers and > am running into some configuration issues. > > 1) sendmail is tough to configure!! I need in/out tcp mail to the > net/lan AND very much desire > ampr.org and pbbs smtp mail in and out. I've looked and zmail (I > think!) and mailgw and am not impressed > with the documentation. In other words, it seems like the others have > their issues and configuration difficulties just like sendmail. > > Has anyone a similar situation and can share some tips or > cinfiguration files/scripts/etc? Is there another > solution out there for the "small network"? We run 6 workstations and > don't need something grossly overdone. > > 2) Along the same lines, my old firewall worked just fine with 2.0.3x > kernels. With the change, some new hardware and new libs, etc I'm > running 2.2.x (ipchains, etc). The AX.25 HOW-TO is fairly out-of-date > and lacking some details in discussing firewalls, ip forwarding and > "bridging" amprnet radio stuff to/from ethernet/internet. Is anyone > doing similar work, ie: many services on one box? Routing is a bear > sometimes and unfortunately, my dns has an illegal entry for > 44.26.1.0/24 and my addresses are 44.26.1.x!! (Actually, 44.26.1.0 > shows up in the amprnet listing at tapr.org!!!) Is there a solution > for ampr name lookups like the old ka9q domain.txt file? > > 3) We have a few Windows workstations and I use QVTNet 4.0 (ansi > terminal emulator) to telnet > over to the various Linux pc's. the vt220 terminfo is lacking in the > keymapping department. Has anyone any experience in building a > terminfo entry or can suggest one that allows such keys as BS AND DEL, > PageUP/DN, F9-12, etc? > > I'm a diehard SuSE fan, running 6.3b2 right now (waiting for the > release version to come in the mail > so I can review it for the Eugene Linux User's Group!). The primary > ham server is running two netrom nodes, CLX, apache, ftp, telnet and > shell. Eventually I'll add FBB or DPBOX to the mix. The net server > also runs apache, ftp, telnet etc. I need to combine the two, get > sendmail working for ampr addresses and > resolve my ethernet<>amprnet routing issues. > > Any hints, help and suggestions (besides reading OLD man pages and > HOW-TO's :+) greatly appreciated. Beer/and/or pizza certificates > could be arranged if I get this done this week! > > Thanks in advance. > > kg7fu > > - > James S. Kaplan KG7FU > Eugene Oregon USA > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.rio.com/~kg7fu > ICQ # 1227639 > Have YOU tried Linux today? > - No argument that Sendmail is tough to configure. I have been using a tool to help with Linux configs in general and it includes a nice interface to Sendmail. The tool is called Webmin. It is a free admin tool that will run on a large varity of *nix platforms. It runs as a daemon with its own built in web server and uses a standard web browser as the interface. It provides a graphical interface to a number of system administration functions including user, DNS, Samba and Sendmail admin and has many more than this. It makes life much simpler and is easy to install. If you decide to try this make sure you back up the config files that you already have as this tool (at least the version I have) assume a new config file and writes one from scratch appending to the already existing file. You can find this at http://www.webmin.com The DNS problem should be fixed to make things work right. I am not a DNS expert but the simple servers I have done are extremely fussy as to config file syntax. That would be my first guess as to that problem. You might try some DNS tools at http://www.domtools.com . The tools might not be any help but they won't hurt. Good luck. And no I am not affiliated with either of these sites :-) Thad Burger KC8EGO Replies welcome. Flames redirect to /dev/null
Re: Subject: sendmail + masq/ipfw solutions for multi-user system?
On Tue, Jan 18, 2000 at 10:28:48PM +1100, Terry Dawson wrote: > > shows up in the amprnet listing at tapr.org!!!) Is there a solution > > for ampr name lookups like the old ka9q domain.txt file? > > The domain.txt file, I think (it's been a good number of years since I > ran NOS) is just the equivalent of the /etc/hosts file. > > I personally think you'd be better off fixing the actual problem though > (the DNS problem or whatever it actually is) than naiively working > around it with manual name->address mappings. Has anyone come up with a method to convert the ampr.org listings from ftp.ucsd.edu to a proper format to use with bind (which appears to me to be more difficult to set up than sendmail?) I'm looking for a solution which could be used on a system not connected full-time to the Internet. I just bought the O'Reilly bind book, but haven't figured this one out yet. I assume I need to create a db.44 file. Bob -- Bob Nielsen, N7XY (ex-W6SWE) (RN2)[EMAIL PROTECTED] Tucson, AZ DM42nh QRP-L #1985 http://www.primenet.com/~nielsen
Re: Subject: sendmail + masq/ipfw solutions for multi-user system?
On Tue, 18 Jan 2000, James S. Kaplan KG7FU wrote: > Perhaps I wasn't clear Does there exist a "how-to", examples or > explicit instructions on how to use sendmail for radio amprnet, radio pbbs, > local delivery and internet delivery ALL on the same box? Rulesets for radio pbbs do exist, or at least I've seen some people try to develop them. The radio pbbs addressing scheme never has mapped well with what the rest of the world uses. I think most of those handling radio pbbs mail do so using dedicated bbs software that understands the addressing. Many of us just simply don't bother handling anything but standard SMTP mail. ... > > > I personally think you'd be better off fixing the actual problem though > > (the DNS problem or whatever it actually is) than naiively working > > around it with manual name->address mappings. > > Ok, I'll bite. How do I fix it? One problem is my isp's DNS has an entry: > > Server: ns1.rio.com > Address: 206.96.130.10 > > Non-authoritative answer: > 0.1.26.44.in-addr.arpaname = crv.lan.ampr.org > > Authoritative answers can be found from: > 44.IN-ADDR.ARPA nameserver = hamradio.ucsd.edu This is correct. The amprnet DNS at hamradio.ucsd.edu has 44.26.1.0 assigned to crv.lan.ampr.org. > > etc. > > But a traceroute from rio.com reveals no route to host, thusly: > traceroute to 44.26.1.0 (44.26.1.0), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets > 1 gatekeeper (206.96.130.254) 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms > > 10 sdsc-gw.san-bb1.cerf.net (134.24.12.26) 406 ms 380 ms 439 ms > 11 192.12.207.5 (192.12.207.5) 406 ms 471 ms 439 ms > 12 muir-rs-backbone.ucsd.edu (132.239.254.11) 469 ms 386 ms 386 ms > 13 ampr.org (44.0.0.1) 381 ms * 465 ms > 14 * * * Yup, that's correct also. > Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't address groups such as 192.168 and 44.0 > considered "private" nets and technically aren't supposed to be routed via No, net 44 is assigned to amateur radio and if we provide an internet connected router the rest of the internet quite happily routes all 44.x.x.x traffic to it. We have such a router, it's called 'mirrorshades' aka 'ampr.org' and it accepts all net 44 traffic from the rest of the internet. It in turn will use IPIP encapsulation to forward IP packets to the various ampr.org gateways scattered around the world. There is no current gateway handling 44.26.1.x so all packets from the internet deadend at mirrorshades. Exactly what your traceroute shows. > internet? Even if they were, the ampr.org docs clearly state that 44.26.1.0 is > for "testing" and is not to be assigned. AND, why does the rest of the world Where does it say this, I find 44.26.1.0 assigned to crv.lan.ampr.org according to the DNS files at hamradio.ampr.org. > know to route 44.26.1.0 to ucsd.edu/ampr.org, yet ampr.org doesn't have it? As I said above, Everything for 44.x.x.x goes to ampr.org at ucsd, but since there is no gateway handling traffic for 44.26.1.x it has no place to go after that. > My local net just happens to be 44.26.1see what the problem is now? Exactly what addresses do you have? I don't find your callsign in the list of assigned addresses at hamradio.ucsd.edu. There are a number of reasons why that might be, but knowing your addresses will help figure things out. > > Like I've been saying, I'm neither a programmer nor a seasoned net > professional. As such, I need a bit more "1-2-3..." guidance than some > of you. I'm sure by the posts I see here that there are many more "Linux > Newbies", new hams, hams new to packet and just plain old dumb hams like myself > that would be more inclined to get heavily into ax.25 networking, instead of > turned off, if it weren't for the lack of simplistic docs and negative > responses from a few vocal, but harsh, hams-in-the-know. > I admit the docs could be better, but, the issues are complex and it isn't easy coming up with cookbook type answers that cover all the permutations. It's much easier coming up with answers to specific circumstances. As far as negative and harsh responses go, not all of us are that way so it's best to just ignore them and wait for the good responses to pop out of the woodwork. Now, what else can I help you with. Ken, N7IPB -- MotorolaEmail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Seattle Cellular Design Center Office: (425) 487-8854 24000 35th Ave SE, Suite 100Cell : (206) 499-4872 Bothell, WA 98021 Fax : (425) 483-3400
Re: Subject: sendmail + masq/ipfw solutions for multi-user system?
On Tue, 18 Jan 2000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > If sendmail is too tough, try 'exim' or 'postfix'. They're both quite > powerful, and easier than sendmail to configure. Perhaps I wasn't clear Does there exist a "how-to", examples or explicit instructions on how to use sendmail for radio amprnet, radio pbbs, local delivery and internet delivery ALL on the same box? > The AX25-HOWTO was never going to cover that material. It is adequately > covered in other HOWTO documents. Try the Networking and IP-Chains > HOWTO's >From what I see, the networking and ip chains howto's are meant for seasoned sysadmins and/or hardcore programmers. There just ain't much in the way of "english language" material for the non-programmer/non-nethead. Again, does there exist any docs on how to ip forward/gateway radio amprnet services with kernel 2.2.x? > The domain.txt file, I think (it's been a good number of years since I > ran NOS) is just the equivalent of the /etc/hosts file. It is. However, I can't seem to find any resources to utilize such information. The closest I've seen is the DNS-HOWTO, again does not provide any assistance for ham radio folks who don't have Ph.D's in net-speak or c++-speak. Can anyone tell me how to configure BIND so amprnet lookups work while not breaking real internet DNS? > I personally think you'd be better off fixing the actual problem though > (the DNS problem or whatever it actually is) than naiively working > around it with manual name->address mappings. Ok, I'll bite. How do I fix it? One problem is my isp's DNS has an entry: Server: ns1.rio.com Address: 206.96.130.10 Non-authoritative answer: 0.1.26.44.in-addr.arpa name = crv.lan.ampr.org Authoritative answers can be found from: 44.IN-ADDR.ARPA nameserver = hamradio.ucsd.edu etc. But a traceroute from rio.com reveals no route to host, thusly: traceroute to 44.26.1.0 (44.26.1.0), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets 1 gatekeeper (206.96.130.254) 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 10 sdsc-gw.san-bb1.cerf.net (134.24.12.26) 406 ms 380 ms 439 ms 11 192.12.207.5 (192.12.207.5) 406 ms 471 ms 439 ms 12 muir-rs-backbone.ucsd.edu (132.239.254.11) 469 ms 386 ms 386 ms 13 ampr.org (44.0.0.1) 381 ms * 465 ms 14 * * * Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't address groups such as 192.168 and 44.0 considered "private" nets and technically aren't supposed to be routed via internet? Even if they were, the ampr.org docs clearly state that 44.26.1.0 is for "testing" and is not to be assigned. AND, why does the rest of the world know to route 44.26.1.0 to ucsd.edu/ampr.org, yet ampr.org doesn't have it? My local net just happens to be 44.26.1see what the problem is now? Like I've been saying, I'm neither a programmer nor a seasoned net professional. As such, I need a bit more "1-2-3..." guidance than some of you. I'm sure by the posts I see here that there are many more "Linux Newbies", new hams, hams new to packet and just plain old dumb hams like myself that would be more inclined to get heavily into ax.25 networking, instead of turned off, if it weren't for the lack of simplistic docs and negative responses from a few vocal, but harsh, hams-in-the-know. I have a myriad of great ideas, application deviations and enthusiasm for amateur packet. I also have a great deal of real-world RF experiences to share and relate to after being a broadcast engineer, microwave maintenance technician and been doing packet radio almost since it's inception. I would happily toss Linux ax.25 stuff for DOS or Windows if those platforms offerings would suit my needs. I have the greatest respect and admiration for all the programmers and individuals who have made Linux what it is. I'm continually bafflled by the responses some programmers and "experts" give to reasonable questions from folks who don't quite have the same level of understanding, experience or education as they. - James S. Kaplan KG7FU Eugene Oregon USA [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.rio.com/~kg7fu ICQ # 1227639 Have YOU tried Linux today? -
Re: Subject: sendmail + masq/ipfw solutions for multi-user system?
Thanks for the nice reply Nate! Yes, I'd like to see your config files. You can replace hostnames, and ip's, etc with bogus info for security if you like. Like I've stated before, I'm no geniusso I need a bit more explicit instructions as well as some working examples. Every installation is unique so those configs help when the supplied defaults and docs don't work. Cheers! On Tue, 18 Jan 2000, Nate Bargmann wrote: > Also, let me know and I'll send you copies of my old config files. - James S. Kaplan KG7FU Eugene Oregon USA [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.rio.com/~kg7fu ICQ # 1227639 Have YOU tried Linux today? -
Re: Subject: sendmail + masq/ipfw solutions for multi-user system?
Hi James. I wish I could offer my time tested and bulletproof solution, but I never deleved into Sendmail further than getting it to route my local and ISP mail correctly. Perhaps my config files might give you some ideas. Just this last week I found something in my old Slackware '96 that wasn't Y2K compliant. On 11 January Sendmail (8.8.8) began reporting name server lookup failures on my ISP's mail server. Everything thing else worked fine and my ISP mail was delivered fine, but outgoing SMTP mail simply stopped working. So, rather than fight it I switched this box over to Debian Slink (2.1) to match my laptop and quit fighting the subtle differences between the two. At this point I haven't delved into the default Debian MTA Exim further than getting local mail routed and having my ISP mail routed correctly. It looks to be an easier program to learn than Sendmail, and I'll have to start working with it once things settle down from the OS switch (still getting my favorite apps back and running in the new glibc env). Btw, if you're interested, I have a copy of O'Reilly's Sendmail book (a.k.a. "the bat book") I purchased in late '98. It covers up to version 8.8.7 I think and seemed current for 8.8.8. Although I understand some config methods have changed with 8.9.x I'd bet it would still be close enough to be useful along with docs from the sendmail site outlining the changes. I used a highlighter on it in a few places and made some notes in pencil in it, but not too many otherwise it is in excellent condition (hasn't been dunked in coffee!). I'd be happy to part with it for half of new price if it'd be useful to you. Also, let me know and I'll send you copies of my old config files. 73, de Nate >> -- Packet | N0NB @ WF0A.#SCKS.KS.USA.NOAM | "None can love freedom Internet | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | heartily, but good Location | Wichita, Kansas USA EM17hs | men; the rest love not Wichita area exams; ham radio; Linux info @ | freedom, but license." http://www.qsl.net/n0nb/ | -- John Milton
Re: Subject: sendmail + masq/ipfw solutions for multi-user system?
On 18 Jan, James S. Kaplan wrote: > 1) sendmail is tough to configure!! I need in/out tcp mail to the > net/lan AND very much desire > ampr.org and pbbs smtp mail in and out. I've looked and zmail (I > think!) and mailgw and am not impressed > with the documentation. In other words, it seems like the others have > their issues and configuration difficulties just like sendmail. If sendmail is too tough, try 'exim' or 'postfix'. They're both quite powerful, and easier than sendmail to configure. > 2) Along the same lines, my old firewall worked just fine with 2.0.3x > kernels. With the change, some new hardware and new libs, etc I'm > running 2.2.x (ipchains, etc). The AX.25 HOW-TO is fairly out-of-date > and lacking some details in discussing firewalls, ip forwarding and > "bridging" amprnet radio stuff to/from ethernet/internet. Is anyone > doing similar work, ie: many services on one box? Routing is a bear The AX25-HOWTO was never going to cover that material. It is adequately covered in other HOWTO documents. Try the Networking and IP-Chains HOWTO's. > sometimes and unfortunately, my dns has an illegal entry for > 44.26.1.0/24 and my addresses are 44.26.1.x!! (Actually, 44.26.1.0 > shows up in the amprnet listing at tapr.org!!!) Is there a solution > for ampr name lookups like the old ka9q domain.txt file? The domain.txt file, I think (it's been a good number of years since I ran NOS) is just the equivalent of the /etc/hosts file. I personally think you'd be better off fixing the actual problem though (the DNS problem or whatever it actually is) than naiively working around it with manual name->address mappings. Terry -- [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: sendmail + masq/ipfw solutions for multi-user system?
As the available tools for Linux Hams increases, so does the complexity of the system..! I am running several Linux pc's for a variety of services, some ax.25 and some supporting our lan (firewall, etc.). I need to consolidate two of the servers and am running into some configuration issues. 1) sendmail is tough to configure!! I need in/out tcp mail to the net/lan AND very much desire ampr.org and pbbs smtp mail in and out. I've looked and zmail (I think!) and mailgw and am not impressed with the documentation. In other words, it seems like the others have their issues and configuration difficulties just like sendmail. Has anyone a similar situation and can share some tips or cinfiguration files/scripts/etc? Is there another solution out there for the "small network"? We run 6 workstations and don't need something grossly overdone. 2) Along the same lines, my old firewall worked just fine with 2.0.3x kernels. With the change, some new hardware and new libs, etc I'm running 2.2.x (ipchains, etc). The AX.25 HOW-TO is fairly out-of-date and lacking some details in discussing firewalls, ip forwarding and "bridging" amprnet radio stuff to/from ethernet/internet. Is anyone doing similar work, ie: many services on one box? Routing is a bear sometimes and unfortunately, my dns has an illegal entry for 44.26.1.0/24 and my addresses are 44.26.1.x!! (Actually, 44.26.1.0 shows up in the amprnet listing at tapr.org!!!) Is there a solution for ampr name lookups like the old ka9q domain.txt file? 3) We have a few Windows workstations and I use QVTNet 4.0 (ansi terminal emulator) to telnet over to the various Linux pc's. the vt220 terminfo is lacking in the keymapping department. Has anyone any experience in building a terminfo entry or can suggest one that allows such keys as BS AND DEL, PageUP/DN, F9-12, etc? I'm a diehard SuSE fan, running 6.3b2 right now (waiting for the release version to come in the mail so I can review it for the Eugene Linux User's Group!). The primary ham server is running two netrom nodes, CLX, apache, ftp, telnet and shell. Eventually I'll add FBB or DPBOX to the mix. The net server also runs apache, ftp, telnet etc. I need to combine the two, get sendmail working for ampr addresses and resolve my ethernet<>amprnet routing issues. Any hints, help and suggestions (besides reading OLD man pages and HOW-TO's :+) greatly appreciated. Beer/and/or pizza certificates could be arranged if I get this done this week! Thanks in advance. kg7fu - James S. Kaplan KG7FU Eugene Oregon USA [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.rio.com/~kg7fu ICQ # 1227639 Have YOU tried Linux today? -
