On 17 Jun 2003 at 22:02, Russell Coker wrote:
On Tue, 17 Jun 2003 21:27, Stefan Neufeind wrote:
What I'm looking for is a possibility to see if this router (that
denies ping- packets) is still available? I have Nagios running and
normally it monitors hosts via ping. So I need a replacement
On 17 Jun 2003 at 22:02, Russell Coker wrote:
On Tue, 17 Jun 2003 21:27, Stefan Neufeind wrote:
What I'm looking for is a possibility to see if this router (that
denies ping- packets) is still available? I have Nagios running and
normally it monitors hosts via ping. So I need a replacement
Hi,
both tracert and ping use ICMP. So did they just block some kind of
ICMP-message (ping) for this router? How could I solve this problem?
I need to check if the route to this router is alive - namely if the
router is up. Can I trick this into working by choosing a TOS for
ping manually
On Tue, 17 Jun 2003 16:05, Stefan Neufeind wrote:
both tracert and ping use ICMP. So did they just block some kind of
ICMP-message (ping) for this router? How could I solve this problem?
Your message was not clear, but it seems that you can see the router on a
traceroute but can't ping
On Tue, 17 Jun 2003 at 10:15:49, Russell Coker wrote:
On Tue, 17 Jun 2003 16:05, Stefan Neufeind wrote:
both tracert and ping use ICMP. So did they just block some kind of
ICMP-message (ping) for this router? How could I solve this problem?
Your message was not clear, but it seems
On Tue, 17 Jun 2003 21:27, Stefan Neufeind wrote:
What I'm looking for is a possibility to see if this router (that denies
ping- packets) is still available? I have Nagios running and normally it
monitors hosts via ping. So I need a replacement that would tell me if this
router on the way
On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 01:27:16PM +0200, Stefan Neufeind wrote:
hosts via ping. So I need a replacement that would tell me if this router on
the way to a server is reachable. I want to test the whole path to see where an
error occured. Well, is it possible to simulate traceroute-like packets
- Gloeckner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 4:01 PM
To: Stefan Neufeind
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Russell Coker
Subject: Re: Router appears in tracert but can't ping?
On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 01:27:16PM +0200, Stefan Neufeind wrote:
hosts via ping. So I need a replacement
Hi,
both tracert and ping use ICMP. So did they just block some kind of
ICMP-message (ping) for this router? How could I solve this problem?
I need to check if the route to this router is alive - namely if the
router is up. Can I trick this into working by choosing a TOS for
ping manually
On Tue, 17 Jun 2003 at 10:15:49, Russell Coker wrote:
On Tue, 17 Jun 2003 16:05, Stefan Neufeind wrote:
both tracert and ping use ICMP. So did they just block some kind of
ICMP-message (ping) for this router? How could I solve this problem?
Your message was not clear, but it seems
On Tue, 17 Jun 2003 21:27, Stefan Neufeind wrote:
What I'm looking for is a possibility to see if this router (that denies
ping- packets) is still available? I have Nagios running and normally it
monitors hosts via ping. So I need a replacement that would tell me if this
router on the way
On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 01:27:16PM +0200, Stefan Neufeind wrote:
hosts via ping. So I need a replacement that would tell me if this router on
the way to a server is reachable. I want to test the whole path to see where
an
error occured. Well, is it possible to simulate traceroute-like
- Gloeckner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 4:01 PM
To: Stefan Neufeind
Cc: debian-isp@lists.debian.org; Russell Coker
Subject: Re: Router appears in tracert but can't ping?
On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 01:27:16PM +0200, Stefan Neufeind wrote:
hosts via ping. So I need
, Christian Kurz wrote:
Warning: time of day goes back, taking countermeasures.
I believe your ping command is using features only available in a newer
kernel. Maybe upgrade your kernel (2.4.4?) or see if your ping has a -U
switch to ignore this.
What should a feature of a kernel has
On Thu, Aug 09, 2001 at 11:12:11AM -0700, Jeremy C. Reed wrote:
On Thu, 9 Aug 2001, Christian Kurz wrote:
If you are really doing professional services then you should know how
to tell your mailer to only send a mail to the list or either insert an
appropriate comment telling me, that
I´m getting this message every time i ping a
machine on the LAN. And just on the LAN.
Warning: time of day goes back, taking
countermeasures.
Any ideas
Thanks in advance.
**
Fernando Casas
LAN-WAN-Internet-Seguridad
Soporte GNU/Linux
celular
On Wed, 8 Aug 2001, Fernando Casas wrote:
I´m getting this message every time i ping a machine on the LAN. And
just on the LAN.
Warning: time of day goes back, taking countermeasures.
I believe your ping command is using features only available in a newer
kernel. Maybe upgrade your kernel
On 01-08-08 Jeremy C. Reed wrote:
On Wed, 8 Aug 2001, Fernando Casas wrote:
I´m getting this message every time i ping a machine on the LAN. And
just on the LAN.
Warning: time of day goes back, taking countermeasures.
I believe your ping command is using features only available
On Wed, 8 Aug 2001, Christian Kurz wrote:
Warning: time of day goes back, taking countermeasures.
I believe your ping command is using features only available in a newer
kernel. Maybe upgrade your kernel (2.4.4?) or see if your ping has a -U
switch to ignore this.
What should
On Thu, 9 Aug 2001, Fernando Casas wrote:
If I use the -U argument, then the message is gone.
And there are no error (or like error) messages.
any ideas?
Try upgrading your kernel (like I mentioned in a previous mail) or try
downgrading your ping.
Warning: time of day goes back
reasons.
Core dumps - hmmm, our admin borken the kernel by incorrectly patching
it.
Ping times - some stupid guy inserted two different CPUs PII 400 and 450.
It's a miracle it was working all together...
-=Czaj-nick=-
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject
reasons.
Core dumps - hmmm, our admin borken the kernel by incorrectly patching
it.
Ping times - some stupid guy inserted two different CPUs PII 400 and 450.
It's a miracle it was working all together...
-=Czaj-nick=-
. bad swap partition (or bad disk controller causing the swap partition to
not work)
3. other bad hardware
4. bad libc6 or other library - not very likely.
It' solved, there were 2 reasons.
Core dumps - hmmm, our admin borken the kernel by incorrectly patching
it.
Ping times - some stupid
, our admin borken the kernel by incorrectly patching
it.
Ping times - some stupid guy inserted two different CPUs PII 400 and 450.
It's a miracle it was working all together...
-=Czaj-nick=-
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL
- hmmm, our admin borken the kernel by incorrectly patching
it.
Ping times - some stupid guy inserted two different CPUs PII 400 and 450.
It's a miracle it was working all together...
-=Czaj-nick=-
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact
On Wed, May 30, 2001 at 08:47:38PM +0200, Przemyslaw Wegrzyn wrote:
On Wed, 30 May 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Aren't you traveling several rfc1149 links?
http://www.blug.linux.no/rfc1149/pinglogg.txt
?!? What do U mean ?
he means you need to give your pigeons some time to rest
On Wed, May 30, 2001 at 09:41:54PM +0200, Przemyslaw Wegrzyn wrote:
Anyway, my problem seems to be hardware:
czajnik@earth:~$ more /proc/misc
Segmentation fault
czajnik@earth:~$
some possible causes:
1. bad memory - most likely.
2. bad swap partition (or bad disk controller causing the
On Wed, May 30, 2001 at 08:47:38PM +0200, Przemyslaw Wegrzyn wrote:
On Wed, 30 May 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Aren't you traveling several rfc1149 links?
http://www.blug.linux.no/rfc1149/pinglogg.txt
?!? What do U mean ?
he means you need to give your pigeons some time to rest
On Wed, May 30, 2001 at 09:41:54PM +0200, Przemyslaw Wegrzyn wrote:
Anyway, my problem seems to be hardware:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ more /proc/misc
Segmentation fault
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$
some possible causes:
1. bad memory - most likely.
2. bad swap partition (or bad disk controller
Look at this:
czajnik@earth:~$ ping 156.17.209.1
PING 156.17.209.1 (156.17.209.1): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 156.17.209.1: icmp_seq=0 ttl=247 time=5427.7 ms
64 bytes from 156.17.209.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=247 time=23.2 ms
64 bytes from 156.17.209.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=247 time=429492829.5 ms
I think that you can get this if you have an MP kernel compiled without
Enhanced Real Time Clock support. The default clock driver apparently
isn't MP-safe.
Ken Seefried, CISSP
Przemyslaw Wegrzyn writes:
Look at this:
czajnik@earth:~$ ping 156.17.209.1
PING 156.17.209.1
Aren't you traveling several rfc1149 links?
http://www.blug.linux.no/rfc1149/pinglogg.txt
On Wed, May 30, 2001 at 03:24:39PM +0200, Przemyslaw Wegrzyn wrote:
Look at this:
czajnik@earth:~$ ping 156.17.209.1
PING 156.17.209.1 (156.17.209.1): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 156.17.209.1
On Wed, 30 May 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Aren't you traveling several rfc1149 links?
http://www.blug.linux.no/rfc1149/pinglogg.txt
?!? What do U mean ?
isn't the ping time measured by storing system time the ICMP ECHO was
sent, and comparng it to the system time the reply arrived ?
I
On Wed, May 30, 2001 at 08:47:38PM +0200, Przemyslaw Wegrzyn wrote:
On Wed, 30 May 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Aren't you traveling several rfc1149 links?
http://www.blug.linux.no/rfc1149/pinglogg.txt
?!? What do U mean ?
It was a joke ... rfc 1149 is IP over avian carriers
Look at this:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ ping 156.17.209.1
PING 156.17.209.1 (156.17.209.1): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 156.17.209.1: icmp_seq=0 ttl=247 time=5427.7 ms
64 bytes from 156.17.209.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=247 time=23.2 ms
64 bytes from 156.17.209.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=247 time=429492829.5 ms
I think that you can get this if you have an MP kernel compiled without
Enhanced Real Time Clock support. The default clock driver apparently
isn't MP-safe.
Ken Seefried, CISSP
Przemyslaw Wegrzyn writes:
Look at this:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ ping 156.17.209.1
PING 156.17.209.1
On Wed, 30 May 2001, Ken Seefried wrote:
I think that you can get this if you have an MP kernel compiled without
Enhanced Real Time Clock support. The default clock driver apparently
isn't MP-safe.
Thx, I'll check it tomorrow :).
Aren't you traveling several rfc1149 links?
http://www.blug.linux.no/rfc1149/pinglogg.txt
On Wed, May 30, 2001 at 03:24:39PM +0200, Przemyslaw Wegrzyn wrote:
Look at this:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ ping 156.17.209.1
PING 156.17.209.1 (156.17.209.1): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 156.17.209.1
On Wed, 30 May 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Aren't you traveling several rfc1149 links?
http://www.blug.linux.no/rfc1149/pinglogg.txt
?!? What do U mean ?
isn't the ping time measured by storing system time the ICMP ECHO was
sent, and comparng it to the system time the reply arrived ?
I
On Wed, May 30, 2001 at 08:47:38PM +0200, Przemyslaw Wegrzyn wrote:
On Wed, 30 May 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Aren't you traveling several rfc1149 links?
http://www.blug.linux.no/rfc1149/pinglogg.txt
?!? What do U mean ?
It was a joke ... rfc 1149 is IP over avian carriers
On Wed, 30 May 2001, Nathan E Norman wrote:
On Wed, May 30, 2001 at 08:47:38PM +0200, Przemyslaw Wegrzyn wrote:
On Wed, 30 May 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Aren't you traveling several rfc1149 links?
http://www.blug.linux.no/rfc1149/pinglogg.txt
?!? What do U mean ?
On Thu, 21 Sep 2000 at 21:46:01 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello All,
Is there a way to log incoming ICMP requests? What would have to be
wrapped in order to basically log all requests of the machine (pings in
particular)
Thanks,
D. Ghost
Package:
On Thu, 21 Sep 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
/sbin/ipchains -I imput -p icmp -l
^
On Thu, 21 Sep 2000, Jeremy L. Gaddis wrote:
/sbin/ipchains -I input -p icmp -l
^
--
Martin Wheeler -StarTEXT - Glastonbury - BA6 9PH - England
[1]
On Thu, 21 Sep 2000 at 21:46:01 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello All,
Is there a way to log incoming ICMP requests? What would have to be
wrapped in order to basically log all requests of the machine (pings in
particular)
Thanks,
D. Ghost
Package: ippl
On Thu, 21 Sep 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
/sbin/ipchains -I imput -p icmp -l
^
On Thu, 21 Sep 2000, Jeremy L. Gaddis wrote:
/sbin/ipchains -I input -p icmp -l
^
--
Martin Wheeler -StarTEXT - Glastonbury - BA6 9PH - England
[1]
Hello All,
Is there a way to log incoming ICMP requests? What would have to be
wrapped in order to basically log all requests of the machine (pings in
particular)
Thanks,
D. Ghost
Sure, just use ipchains:
/sbin/ipchains -I input -p icmp -l
-jg
--
Jeremy L. Gaddis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2000 9:46 PM
To: debian-isp
Subject:ping
Hello All,
Is there a way
--
Jeremy L. Gaddis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2000 9:46 PM
To: debian-isp
Subject: ping
Hello All,
Is there a way to log incoming ICMP requests? What would have to be
wrapped in order
On Wed, Sep 13, 2000 at 07:13:07PM -0400, Chris Wagner wrote:
Maybe he means ping floods? Pings of death usually will crash a
box after a few packets hit it. As you said Debian is good about
those kinds of things.
Are these things just malformed packets / frames sent to some machine
On Wed, Sep 13, 2000 at 07:13:07PM -0400, Chris Wagner wrote:
Maybe he means ping floods? Pings of death usually will crash a
box after a few packets hit it. As you said Debian is good about
those kinds of things.
Are these things just malformed packets / frames sent to some machine
On Thu, Sep 14, 2000 at 08:39:41PM +0200, Sven Burgener wrote:
On Wed, Sep 13, 2000 at 07:13:07PM -0400, Chris Wagner wrote:
Maybe he means ping floods? Pings of death usually will crash a
box after a few packets hit it. As you said Debian is good about
those kinds of things
What ping of death attacks?
The only ones I have heard of, were fixed with kernel patches seriously
quick after they came out.
On Wed, 13 Sep 100, Allen Ahoffman wrote:
Yes, I should find this elsewhere, but for speed's sake I'll ask here
anyway.
Is Linux Debian or other vulnerable
At 11:33 AM 9/13/00 -0600, Nathan wrote:
What ping of death attacks?
The only ones I have heard of, were fixed with kernel patches seriously
quick after they came out.
Maybe he means ping floods? Pings of death usually will crash a box after a
few packets hit it. As you said Debian is good
What ping of death attacks?
The only ones I have heard of, were fixed with kernel patches seriously
quick after they came out.
On Wed, 13 Sep 100, Allen Ahoffman wrote:
Yes, I should find this elsewhere, but for speed's sake I'll ask here
anyway.
Is Linux Debian or other vulnerable to ping
54 matches
Mail list logo
