Hi
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 11:32:08PM +, Pigeon wrote:
> I am trying to set up my Linux box to connect to my Waitrose ISP
> account. I am using this one rather than my ukonline one because
> ukonline requires my box to fetch DNS addresses every time it logs on,
> whereas Waitros
Pigeon said:
> Please could someone suggest exactly the right questions to ask the ISP,
> so I don't have to keep ding-donging emails back and forth,
> rebooting from Linux to Windoze all the time cos the Linux box isn't on
> line yet?
What I would ask:
- what terminal se
Pigeon writes:
> I am trying to set up my Linux box to connect to my Waitrose ISP
> account. I am using this one rather than my ukonline one because ukonline
> requires my box to fetch DNS addresses every time it logs on,...
Ppp can deal with this. Just select 'Dynamic'
Can you dial in manually and record the dialog? It's been a long time
since I had to do that, but that's how I did it years ago.
Patrick
On Mon, 25 Nov 2002 at 11:32pm, Pigeon wrote:
:I am trying to set up my Linux box to connect to my Waitrose ISP
:account. I am using this one rath
I am trying to set up my Linux box to connect to my Waitrose ISP
account. I am using this one rather than my ukonline one because
ukonline requires my box to fetch DNS addresses every time it logs on,
whereas Waitrose has static ones - keep it simple.
I have run pppconfig and entered all the
- Original Message -
> From: "Lorenzo Fini" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 9:47 PM
> Subject: cannot connect to ISP
>
> > after an upgrade from potato to woody I cannot connect to internet by
> > my mo
>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 9:47 PM
Subject: cannot connect to ISP
> after an upgrade from potato to woody I cannot connect to internet by
> my modem any more.
> I use pppconfig and pon. The modem make the phone number correctly,
> but when it rece
after an upgrade from potato to woody I cannot connect to internet by
my modem any more.
I use pppconfig and pon. The modem make the phone number correctly,
but when it receives 'CONNECT' from the remote the connection is
terminated. I tried wvdial/other isp but with the same result.
I want to install an anti-virus for Linux for an ISP with 400.000 email
>accounts.
> I see a lot of anti-virus but they are licensed by user. This is not
>compatible for us.
> Anyone knows any good anti-virus that is not licensed this way?
> Much Thanks,Pa
On Sat, 19 Oct 2002 14:27:27 +
Paulo Henrique Baptista de Oliveira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> Hi Jamin,
> is Open Antivirus mature enough? Like other comercial AV.
> TIA,Paulo Henrique
> Em Sat, 19 Oct 2002 12:12:40 -0500
>
Hello,
I am by no means a virus ex
On Sat, 19 Oct 2002 14:27:27 + Paulo Henrique Baptista de Oliveira
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> is Open Antivirus mature enough? Like other comercial AV.
I haven't had a problem with them, YMMV.
--
Jamin W. Collins
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "u
IIRC the F-Secure virus scanner can be licensed by host.
HTH
Martin
On Sat, Oct 19, 2002 at 12:15:59PM +, Paulo Henrique Baptista de Oliveira wrote:
>
> Hi all,
> I want to install an anti-virus for Linux for an ISP with 400.000 email
>accounts.
> I se
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> > Hi all,
> > I want to install an anti-virus for Linux for an ISP with 400.000
> > email accounts. I see a lot of anti-virus but they are licensed by
> > user. This is not compatible for us. Anyone knows an
On Sat, 19 Oct 2002 12:15:59 + Paulo Henrique Baptista de Oliveira
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
> I want to install an anti-virus for Linux for an ISP with 400.000
> email accounts. I see a lot of anti-virus but they are licensed by
>
Try f-prot, the linux-version is not licensed in this way.
See: http://www.f-prot.com/products/fplin.html
Victor
On Sat, 2002-10-19 at 14:15, Paulo Henrique Baptista de Oliveira wrote:
>
> Hi all,
> I want to install an anti-virus for Linux for an ISP with 400.000 email
Hi all,
I want to install an anti-virus for Linux for an ISP with 400.000 email
accounts.
I see a lot of anti-virus but they are licensed by user. This is not
compatible for us.
Anyone knows any good anti-virus that is not licensed this way?
Much Thanks
On Sun, Sep 01, 2002 at 10:25:36PM +0100, Anna Lawless wrote:
> Having finally got what I thought was a working box, I can't dial
> out. Whichever method I use, I either can't connect to my ISP or
> the connection is refused by my box.
> I type 'pon', having set
Anna Lawless wrote:
> Having finally got what I thought was a working box, I can't dial
> out. Whichever method I use, I either can't connect to my ISP or
> the connection is refused by my box.
> I type 'pon', having set up ppp in the normal Debian way. Nothing
&g
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sunday 01 Sep 2002 10:25 pm, Anna Lawless wrote:
> Having finally got what I thought was a working box, I can't dial
> out. Whichever method I use, I either can't connect to my ISP or
> the connection is refused by my box.
>
Having finally got what I thought was a working box, I can't dial
out. Whichever method I use, I either can't connect to my ISP or
the connection is refused by my box.
I type 'pon', having set up ppp in the normal Debian way. Nothing
happens. I'll go back into it to try t
' here, in the
> header setting of the iptables script for a standalone host.
>
> Example:
>
> IPADDR="63.144.170.4" # your IP address
> SUBNET_BASE="63.144.179.0" # ISP network segment base address
> SUBNET_BROADCAST=&
dalone host.
Example:
IPADDR="63.144.170.4"# your IP address
SUBNET_BASE="63.144.179.0" # ISP network segment base address
SUBNET_BROADCAST="255.255.255.240" # network segment broadcast address
MY_ISP="63.144.170.0/28"
gt; address resolves against ppp-xxx.3com.telinco.net).
>
> I have a standard exim setup, except that I use smtp auth to (I
> thought!) always send mail through my isp.
>
> Thanks for any help.
> Rory
>
> Excerpted exim.conf:
>
> host_accep
> "d" == dman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
d> Ok, that's cool. Now run IE on Windows on a client behind your
d> firewall. Surf to a site running IIS and Nimbda. You've got
d> Nimda. Lotta goog the firewall did there.
Actually, snort[1] and or ACiD grabs those and flags them...
exim setup, except that I use smtp auth to (I
thought!) always send mail through my isp.
Thanks for any help.
Rory
Excerpted exim.conf:
host_accept_relay = 127.0.0.1 : 1
host_auth_accept_relay = *
trusted_users = mail
smtp_verify = true
gecos_pattern
On Sat, Apr 20, 2002 at 07:30:06AM -0500, will trillich wrote:
| On Fri, Apr 19, 2002 at 09:28:17AM -0700, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
| > HELO dontuthink.com
| > 250 server Hello 12-235-84-58.client.attbi.com [12.235.84.58]
| > MAIL FROM:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| > 250 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> is syntactica
begin ben quotation:
> other guy--and i'm saying this for his benefit even more than yours--is
> placing way too much faith in an idea that's all too close to the catholic's
> belief in the rhythm method.
This is the last thing I'm going to say on this. Quoting "Practical
Unix and Internet Sec
begin Noah Meyerhans quotation:
>
> You would firewall an ISP's network??? I would switch providers
> immediately if my ISP ever did such a thing.
No, I would firewall the internal servers off from both the outside
world and the customers, opening only the ports each needed to a
that all ports on all hosts are
> > visible to the world. To me, this as a fundamental fact of networking.
>
> That probably works on a small network. Try it with several thousand
> servers and 200,000 users, not counting internet customers. Or try it
> with an ISP, where you can't control the configuration on ANY of the
> users' computers.
>
> I've worked in both situations. Firewalls are a godsend.
>
>
>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sunday 21 April 2002 12:05 am, Noah Meyerhans wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 21, 2002 at 02:51:51AM -0400, Shawn McMahon wrote:
> > That probably works on a small network. Try it with several thousand
> > servers and 200,000 users, not counting internet customers. Or try it
> > w
On Sun, Apr 21, 2002 at 02:51:51AM -0400, Shawn McMahon wrote:
> That probably works on a small network. Try it with several thousand
> servers and 200,000 users, not counting internet customers. Or try it
> with an ISP, where you can't control the configuration on ANY of the
>
s and 200,000 users, not counting internet customers. Or try it
with an ISP, where you can't control the configuration on ANY of the
users' computers.
I've worked in both situations. Firewalls are a godsend.
--
Shawn McMahon| McMahon's Laws of Linux supp
On Sun, Apr 21, 2002 at 02:11:05AM -0400, Shawn McMahon wrote:
> A DMZ is still behind the firewall. A DMZ is it's own little isolated
> corner where all traffic to the Internet goes through the firewall, and
> all traffic to the LAN goes through the firewall. That way, if the
> server is cracked
begin will trillich quotation:
>
> thanks. i did similar tests at paladinCorp.com (specifically,
> http://www.paladincorp.com.au/unix/spam/spamlart/ ) and they
> found some instaces where my setup didn't retch at certain
> questionable email syntaxes:
Don't use them. The true test is if your sy
begin Noah Meyerhans quotation:
>
> So what are you suggesting, then? This was Will's mail server we're
> talking about. First you say it needs to be behind the firewall or else
> it's doomed to be cracked, then you say it needs to be in the DMZ.
A DMZ is still behind the firewall. A DMZ is i
On Thu, Apr 18, 2002 at 09:42:06PM -0700, David Smead wrote:
> That's why you run those services in a DMZ.
>
So what are you suggesting, then? This was Will's mail server we're
talking about. First you say it needs to be behind the firewall or else
it's doomed to be cracked, then you say it nee
On Fri, Apr 19, 2002 at 09:00:15PM -0400, Shawn McMahon wrote:
> > Noah (and I) didn't say a firewall was useless, just that discussing
> > firewalls when the problem is a (potential) mail relay is wholly
> > pointless.
>
> Noah did say that. You, to the best of my knowledge, didn't.
Yes, I cert
g multicast, you can safely block these. I've added
rules to my firewalls to silently drop the entire multicast range for now
224.0.0.0/8. Since they are explictly dropped, they never reach my
logging chain (I wouldn't suggest running a firewall without one).
> is all this activity
will trillich wrote:
>
[ snip ]
> when i first set up ipCop (ipcop.org) i got about 18mb of
> logfile in one afternoon from the default firewall logging rules
> (via ipchains on potato):
>
> Apr 2 12:18:41 troll kernel: Packet log: input - eth1 PROTO=89
> 63.64.14.221:65535 224.0.0.5:65535 L
uthink.com/serensoft.com that
you shouldn't be seeing those packets. But it looks like you're on a
cable and only the ISP knows what IPs are out there on that particular
cable.
- start of probe --
Domain Name: DONTUTHINK.COM
Registrar: NETWORK SOLUTIONS,
On Fri, Apr 19, 2002 at 09:28:17AM -0700, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
> HELO dontuthink.com
> 250 server Hello 12-235-84-58.client.attbi.com [12.235.84.58]
> MAIL FROM:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 250 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> is syntactically correct
> RCPT TO:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 550 relaying to <[EMAIL PROTE
eted the final (reject-and-log) rule of the incoming
ruleset...
is all this activity from a goofy setup by my isp? is it
something i'm doing? surely this much probing must mean
something...
> If that rootkit was installed by somebody exploiting a samba which
> should have been blocke
begin dman quotation:
>
> Noah (and I) didn't say a firewall was useless, just that discussing
> firewalls when the problem is a (potential) mail relay is wholly
> pointless.
Noah did say that. You, to the best of my knowledge, didn't.
The original poster was concerned of a number of things, i
* dman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [020419 09:10]:
> On Fri, Apr 19, 2002 at 11:22:56AM -0400, Shawn McMahon wrote:
> | begin Noah Meyerhans quotation:
> | > HA! That's the most rediculous thing I've ever heard on this list.
> |
> | "ridiculous".
"pedantic".
> |
> | > The
> | > only thing a firewall
HELO dontuthink.com
250 server Hello 12-235-84-58.client.attbi.com [12.235.84.58]
MAIL FROM:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
250 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> is syntactically correct
RCPT TO:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
550 relaying to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> prohibited by administrator
if you are relaying, I do not see how.
If s
On Fri, Apr 19, 2002 at 11:22:56AM -0400, Shawn McMahon wrote:
| begin Noah Meyerhans quotation:
| > HA! That's the most rediculous thing I've ever heard on this list.
|
| "ridiculous".
|
| > The
| > only thing a firewall is good for is to provide you with a false sense
| > of security.
|
| A
begin Noah Meyerhans quotation:
>
> And what do you do when a security vulnerability arises in your firewall
> implementation?
The same thing you do when that happens with any other component of your
network; fix it, have plans in place to recover from it, and have
monitoring in place to detect
begin Noah Meyerhans quotation:
>
> HA! That's the most rediculous thing I've ever heard on this list.
"ridiculous".
> The
> only thing a firewall is good for is to provide you with a false sense
> of security.
A firewall is a useful tool for securing a network. If you don't know
enough abou
On Thu, Apr 18, 2002 at 10:16:50PM -0700, David Smead wrote:
> I will tell you that sendmail and the general issue of mail handling has
> been and will continue to be a security issue.
What does sendmail have to do with this? From Will's original post:
>Exim version 3.12 #1 built 03-Jan-
On Thu, Apr 18, 2002 at 11:11:37PM -0700, David Smead wrote:
| The first mistake is running Windows.
True.
| The second mistake is not putting Windows machines all on their own
| subnet with a firewall between it and the `good' machines on the Linux
| subnet.
It makes no difference. The windows
On Fri, 2002-04-19 at 03:57, will trillich wrote:
> debian-users: i've got what may be a nasty situation about to
> happen. any pointers welcome...
>
> does 'presumed innocent' operate on the mentality of the average
> isp? i'm getting the impress
on Thu, Apr 18, 2002, Osamu Aoki ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Hi,
> On Thu, Apr 18, 2002 at 09:57:45PM -0500, will trillich wrote:
> > debian-users: i've got what may be a nasty situation about to
> > happen. any pointers welcome...
> >
> > just got a &#x
The first mistake is running Windows.
The second mistake is not putting Windows machines all on their own
subnet with a firewall between it and the `good' machines on the Linux
subnet.
Aynone who can secure Windows itself with a firewall product has a ready
and steady market!
--
Sincerely,
Dav
On Thu, Apr 18, 2002 at 10:16:50PM -0700, David Smead wrote:
| Noah,
|
| The more programs running on a computer, the less secure it is. A
| firewall can run a mimimal system - see the LEAF project with deep Debian
| roots. If you run a firewall running out of RAM then not only will it be
| mini
I didn't claim that firewalls are a panacea, or a network can be trusted.
I will tell you that sendmail and the general issue of mail handling has
been and will continue to be a security issue. You can avoid some of
these problems by letting your ISP gather your mail which you later
retrieve
On Thu, Apr 18, 2002 at 09:42:06PM -0700, David Smead wrote:
> That's why you run those services in a DMZ.
>
And what do you do when a security vulnerability arises in your firewall
implementation? Or when an attacker is able to hijack a web browsing
session by one of your internal users?
The i
That's why you run those services in a DMZ.
--
Sincerely,
David Smead
http://www.amplepower.com.
On Thu, 18 Apr 2002, Noah Meyerhans wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 18, 2002 at 08:05:31PM -0700, David Smead wrote:
> > Are you operating behind a firewall. There are only two kinds of systems
> > operating
Hi,
On Thu, Apr 18, 2002 at 09:57:45PM -0500, will trillich wrote:
> debian-users: i've got what may be a nasty situation about to
> happen. any pointers welcome...
>
> just got a 'heads up' from an ally at my isp that someone's
> reported "dontUthi
On Thu, Apr 18, 2002 at 09:57:45PM -0500, will trillich wrote:
> just got a 'heads up' from an ally at my isp that someone's
> reported "dontUthink.com" as a spammer. i'm running debian
> potato/exim--
You really need to find out the nature of the complai
On Thu, Apr 18, 2002 at 08:05:31PM -0700, David Smead wrote:
> Are you operating behind a firewall. There are only two kinds of systems
> operating without firewalls - those that are hacked and those that will be
> soon.
HA! That's the most rediculous thing I've ever heard on this list. The
only
a nasty situation about to
> happen. any pointers welcome...
>
> just got a 'heads up' from an ally at my isp that someone's
> reported "dontUthink.com" as a spammer. i'm running debian
> potato/exim--
>
> Exim version 3.12 #1 built 03-Jan-
debian-users: i've got what may be a nasty situation about to
happen. any pointers welcome...
just got a 'heads up' from an ally at my isp that someone's
reported "dontUthink.com" as a spammer. i'm running debian
potato/exim--
Exim version
on Wed, Apr 10, 2002, John Hasler ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Karsten M. Self writes:
> > ...you'll probably also find instances for your .fetchmail configuration
> > and possibly a newsserver configuration.
>
> I suggest using a different password for newsserver authentication if
> possible.
So
Karsten M. Self writes:
> ...you'll probably also find instances for your .fetchmail configuration
> and possibly a newsserver configuration.
I suggest using a different password for newsserver authentication if
possible.
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Hasler)
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood,
I believe that by default for a dial in account that would be in
/etc/chatscripts/provider, together with the other chat tokens (phone number,
modem initialization string and some more).
--- Begin Message ---
Hi,
Does anyone know where the user name and password
would be for your isp ???
I
on Wed, Apr 10, 2002, Rodney Agha ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Hi,
> Does anyone know where the user name and password would be for your isp ???
> I thought it was the ppp file, ?
> Does anyone know ?
Be more specific. For what protocols and/or actions.
For ppp dialup, modify
On Wed, 2002-04-10 at 16:12, Rodney Agha wrote:
> Hi,
> Does anyone know where the user name and password would be for your isp ???
> I thought it was the ppp file, ?
> Does anyone know ?
Usually /etc/ppp/pap-secrets or /etc/ppp/chap-secrets depending on how
you connect. You should u
Hi,
Does anyone know where the user name and password
would be for your isp ???
I thought it was the ppp file, ?
Does anyone know ?
On Sat, Mar 09, 2002 at 05:40:10PM +0200, Juhan Kundla wrote:
> So my question is: what should i do? Should i report
> this to my ISP? Should i block the IP address of the scanner? (This is
> probably bad idea, since we have here dynamic IP-addresses) I don't want to
> overreact
computer, which has same ISP as me. As far as i
can tell, my firewall has not being compromised in any way. If those
scans were prelude to some kind of attack, this attack either never took
place or it failed. So my question is: what should i do? Should i report
this to my ISP? Should i block the IP
Hei!
Firstly, i am a linux newbie. I have a small network of computers here,
which i have to look after. This network is connected to internet via debian
woody firewall. This firewall is being portscanned quite often. Those
scans originated from a computer, which has same ISP as me. As far as i
On Mon, 14 Jan 2002, dman wrote:
> The suits are probably the only ones who would actually pay for
> someone to tell them they don't know what they're doing :-). The rest
> of us come here and get your support for free ;-).
I was on the end of an escallations queue that the local cable companies
On Mon, Jan 14, 2002 at 04:22:28PM -0800, Paul 'Baloo' Johnson wrote:
...
| [1] I am starting to doubt if there's anybody but suits in the bay area,
| from the people that make it to Portland I meet, my trip to Redwood City
| and my experiance taking tech support calls, this seems unlikely that
|
all:
i heartly agree with noah. i too am a speakeasy customer after my former isp
(verio) attempted to dump me onto earthlink.net (huh???). anyway, customer
satisfaction has been nothing short of excellent. i am running two dns
servers at home with the two ip's furnished by speakeasy. i
On Mon, 14 Jan 2002, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> Hi, Here is an [EMAIL PROTECTED] customer who was moved to new ATTBI.COM
> service in Northern California. New terms of service states additional
> "no-Server" policy. Yuck !!. (I never signed it but sent to me when
> change happened. So it is legally
On Mon, 14 Jan 2002, Adam Majer wrote:
> Yes they do, _but_ it's not trully static and if you want trully static you
> need
> to play $60 for biz cable and $20 for static - that about US$50/mo.
The point is it won't be changing often enough for it to not count as
static, unless you live in Illin
On Mon, Jan 14, 2002 at 03:41:36PM -0800, Paul 'Baloo' Johnson wrote:
> Cable setup is pretty straightforward. I used to do tech support for
> @Home before I got laid off and got a better paying job as a security
> guard. Other than the dying @Home network, I don't think there's a
> cable network
Hi, Here is an [EMAIL PROTECTED] customer who was moved to new ATTBI.COM
service in Northern California. New terms of service states additional
"no-Server" policy. Yuck !!. (I never signed it but sent to me when
change happened. So it is legally not binding.)
On Mon, Jan 14, 2002 at 03:41:36P
On Mon, 14 Jan 2002, Jason M. Harvey wrote:
> dsl - the local telco is verizon. if you get their residential package,
> i'm pretty sure they use pppoe on adsl...
At least in the Portland, Oregon area they do not use PPPoE (though even
though they got the "don't use PPPoE" idea right, it doesn't s
em to).
They're certainly not the cheapest ISP in the country, but they may very
well be the best. I've been their customer for a bit more than a year
now, and have not experienced a single unscheduled outtage.
noah
--
___
| Web: ht
it. their
buisiness class dsl (sdsl) should use tcp/ip with no user-authentication
such as pppoe.
if you can find an isp that uses covad (www.covad.com) as a clec, that
would be nice. their sdsl packages may start around $100 per month for
192k and go up (and maybe past) 1.5 mb/s. if these isp's use
I'm moving to NYC in the next couple of weeks to start a new job. Can anyone
provide recommendations for ISPs that will allow me to run a few debian boxes
(and one iMac) with a minimum of hassle? I'm looking to avoid ISPs that
require proprietary software or funky configs just to get them to w
I thought I'd finally traced my lockups to my ISP, but it's just
happened again with a different ISP :(
Now I'm looking into some BIOS settings related to the hard disk. But it
may be time to go back to kernel 2.2.20.
Anthony
--
Anthony Campbell - running Linux GNU/Debian (Wi
der about power management myself; I do have it set in the
BIOS, so I could try disabling it. I'm not sure if the time interval is
always the same.
Anyway, I'm beginning to think it's just another of those computer
mysteries with which life abounds. Since it seems to be
; > > > I only have Linux at present, though I'm planning to play with
> > > > > FreeBSD. Oddly enough, the problem has never occurred with my
> > > > > laptop, using the same ISP and the same kernel.
> > > >
> > > > do you have the same
FreeBSD.
> > > > Oddly enough, the problem has never occurred with my laptop, using the
> > > > same ISP and the same kernel.
> > >
> > > do you have the same version of ppp on both machines?
> >
> > Yes: 2.4.1.uus-1 on both.
>
> so what are
as never occurred with my laptop, using the
> > > same ISP and the same kernel.
> >
> > do you have the same version of ppp on both machines?
>
> Yes: 2.4.1.uus-1 on both.
so what are you actually doing, what apps are running when the system locks
up? you also mentioned
On 04 Jan 2002, ben wrote:
> On Friday 04 January 2002 02:46 am, Anthony Campbell wrote:
>
> > I only have Linux at present, though I'm planning to play with FreeBSD.
> > Oddly enough, the problem has never occurred with my laptop, using the
> > same ISP and the same
On Friday 04 January 2002 02:46 am, Anthony Campbell wrote:
> I only have Linux at present, though I'm planning to play with FreeBSD.
> Oddly enough, the problem has never occurred with my laptop, using the
> same ISP and the same kernel.
do you have the same version of ppp on both machines?
On 03 Jan 2002, ben wrote:
> On Thursday 03 January 2002 05:16 am, Anthony Campbell wrote:
> > I've been posting complaints here for some time about total lockups
> > using the 2.4.x kernels. They occur when, and only when, I'm on line.
> > Today I tried using a diff
I've been posting complaints here for some time about total lockups
using the 2.4.x kernels. They occur when, and only when, I'm on line.
Today I tried using a different ISP and was online for an hour, doing a
long download, without any problems.
I can't see any way in which my I
pico,mcedit,vi or joe,ncftp package or simply ftp..
At 07:28 PM 1/1/02, mikepolniak wrote:
What do i need to create a simple index.html page, and upload it to my isp
web hosting
site. I will mostly use jpeg files from screen shots and digital camera.
--
Save bandwidth and time - Get
What do i need to create a simple index.html page, and upload it to my isp web
hosting
site. I will mostly use jpeg files from screen shots and digital camera.
--
Save bandwidth and time - Get Mailfilter - The Anti-Spam Utility
http://mailfilter.sourceforge.net/index.html
Whenever I start mozilla I get the local page:
file:///usr/share/doc/mozilla/localstart.html
which is subtitled:
"This is a local page to avoid using the network on disconnected machines."
That's fine by me. I don't want to make an internet connection unless I've
requested it.
However, out
On Wed, Nov 21, 2001 at 09:08:25AM +1000, john wrote:
> Fred Bloom wrote:
>
> > Cobalt is a linux ISP out of the box.
> >
> > J.H.M. Dassen (Ray) wrote:
> >
>
> Many people regard Cobalt as a piece of junk aimed at wannabe ISPs. My
> impression
> is th
"Karsten M. Self" wrote:
>
> on Fri, Nov 23, 2001 at 04:59:12PM -0800, Petro ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 22, 2001 at 09:40:37PM -0800, Karsten M. Self wrote:
> > > on Thu, Nov 22, 2001 at 02:12:17AM -0800, Petro ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> > > wrote:
> > > > > Bruce Schneier identifi
On Fri, Nov 23, 2001 at 06:51:16PM -0800, Karsten M. Self wrote:
> on Fri, Nov 23, 2001 at 04:59:12PM -0800, Petro ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 22, 2001 at 09:40:37PM -0800, Karsten M. Self wrote:
> > > on Thu, Nov 22, 2001 at 02:12:17AM -0800, Petro
> ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> > > wrot
On Fri, Nov 23, 2001 at 06:51:16PM -0800, Karsten M. Self wrote:
> ... I'd prefer a modularized, single-app approach to the monolithic
> design of OpenOffice.
Actually I understand OpenOffice is decomposing the monolithic
StarOffice 5x model into single apps.
--
Carl Fink [EMAIL PR
on Fri, Nov 23, 2001 at 04:59:12PM -0800, Petro ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 22, 2001 at 09:40:37PM -0800, Karsten M. Self wrote:
> > on Thu, Nov 22, 2001 at 02:12:17AM -0800, Petro ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> > wrote:
> > > On Wed, Nov 21, 2001 at 11:04:32PM -0800, Karsten M. Self wrote:
<.
On Thu, Nov 22, 2001 at 09:40:37PM -0800, Karsten M. Self wrote:
> on Thu, Nov 22, 2001 at 02:12:17AM -0800, Petro ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 21, 2001 at 11:04:32PM -0800, Karsten M. Self wrote:
> > > on Tue, Nov 20, 2001 at 01:38:11PM -0800, Mark Ferlatte
> > > ([EMAIL PROTECTED]
401 - 500 of 961 matches
Mail list logo
