f...@dnsbed.com wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> as you see this PTR,
>
> $ dig -x 1.1.1.1 +short
> one.one.one.one.
>
> so 2.2.2.2 can have the PTR two.two.two.two? and 3.3.3.3 can have
> three.three.three.three?
A simple counter example is
$ dig -x 8.8.8.8 +short
dns.google.
> Sorry I am not good a
On Fri, 24 Mar 2023 20:32:31 -0400
Greg Wooledge wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 25, 2023 at 08:28:03AM +0800, f...@dnsbed.com wrote:
> > Greetings,
> >
> > as you see this PTR,
> >
> > $ dig -x 1.1.1.1 +short
> > one.one.one.one.
> >
> > so 2.2.2.2 can have the PTR two.two.two.two? and 3.3.3.3 can have
On 2023-03-25 08:32, Greg Wooledge wrote:
On Sat, Mar 25, 2023 at 08:28:03AM +0800, f...@dnsbed.com wrote:
Greetings,
as you see this PTR,
$ dig -x 1.1.1.1 +short
one.one.one.one.
so 2.2.2.2 can have the PTR two.two.two.two? and 3.3.3.3 can have
three.three.three.three?
Any IP address can h
On 25/3/23 08:32, Greg Wooledge wrote:
I didn't know .one was a valid TLD. It looks like .two is not, so if
someone were to assign "two.two.two.two" as the PTR value of an IP
address, that PTR would not resolve back to any IP address. (An IP
address block owner might reject such a petition.)
On Sat, Mar 25, 2023 at 08:28:03AM +0800, f...@dnsbed.com wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> as you see this PTR,
>
> $ dig -x 1.1.1.1 +short
> one.one.one.one.
>
> so 2.2.2.2 can have the PTR two.two.two.two? and 3.3.3.3 can have
> three.three.three.three?
Any IP address can have any PTR value. You just
Greetings,
as you see this PTR,
$ dig -x 1.1.1.1 +short
one.one.one.one.
so 2.2.2.2 can have the PTR two.two.two.two? and 3.3.3.3 can have
three.three.three.three?
Sorry I am not good at the DNS knowledge.
Regards.
is unaffected. I'd
just like to know more about why this is happening.
I always have syslog and my graylog server, but both the ring buffer
and systemd journal are basically useless because of this constant
flapping
This is how I'm building the vxlan interface in
/etc/network/interfaces (
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 04/22/08 03:54, Thierry Chatelet wrote:
> On Tuesday 22 April 2008 10:48:04 Ron Johnson wrote:
>> There's a package in the repository that well scan your Apache logs
>> and generate appropriate IPtables rules. Sadly, I don't remember
>> the name.
>
On Tuesday 22 April 2008 11:26:23 Peter Werner wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 03:48:04AM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
> > There's a package in the repository that well scan your Apache logs
> > and generate appropriate IPtables rules. Sadly, I don't remember
> > the name.
>
> it is calle
Hello,
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 03:48:04AM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
> There's a package in the repository that well scan your Apache logs
> and generate appropriate IPtables rules. Sadly, I don't remember
> the name.
it is called fail2ban.
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
On Tuesday 22 April 2008 10:54:51 Thierry Chatelet wrote:
> On Tuesday 22 April 2008 10:48:04 Ron Johnson wrote:
> > There's a package in the repository that well scan your Apache logs
> > and generate appropriate IPtables rules. Sadly, I don't remember
> > the name.
> >
> > --
> > Ron Johnson, Jr
On Tuesday 22 April 2008 10:48:04 Ron Johnson wrote:
>
> There's a package in the repository that well scan your Apache logs
> and generate appropriate IPtables rules. Sadly, I don't remember
> the name.
>
> --
> Ron Johnson, Jr.
Old age, Ron? Well I guess I too am better to get use to it.
Thierr
bout 10 different IP addresses hosted
>>> on servers from Netherland to Asia) to log into my server. I known, I can
>>> do it using deny from + IP in each virtual host. What I would prefer to
>>> do is deny those IP's from the server, not from each host.My server is
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Thierry Chatelet wrote:
> On Tuesday 22 April 2008 08:46:40 Bob Cox wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 08:35:17 +0200, Thierry Chatelet ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> wrote:
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ host 88.131.106.6
>> 6.106.131.88.in-addr.arpa is an alias for
On Tuesday 22 April 2008 08:46:40 Bob Cox wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 08:35:17 +0200, Thierry Chatelet ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ host 88.131.106.6
> 6.106.131.88.in-addr.arpa is an alias for
> 6.0-26.106.131.88.in-addr.arpa.
> 6.0-26.106.131.88.in-addr.arpa domain na
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 08:35:17 +0200, Thierry Chatelet ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
> On Tuesday 22 April 2008 08:14:43 Bob Cox wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 07:08:22 +0200, Thierry Chatelet ([EMAIL
> > PROTECTED])
> wrote:
> > > Hello
> > > I know it's not really debian related, but:
> >
On Tuesday 22 April 2008 08:14:43 Bob Cox wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 07:08:22 +0200, Thierry Chatelet ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
> > Hello
> > I know it's not really debian related, but:
> > A site call ripe.net is trying all sorts of addresses to go inside my
> > sites, like mysite.com/var/
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 07:08:22 +0200, Thierry Chatelet ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
> Hello
> I know it's not really debian related, but:
> A site call ripe.net is trying all sorts of addresses to go inside my sites,
> like mysite.com/var/www/documents and so on.
That certainly seems like odd
nown, I can
> > do it using deny from + IP in each virtual host. What I would prefer to
> > do is deny those IP's from the server, not from each host.My server is
> > running etch ->
> > apache2.2.3-4. How can I do that?
> > Thierry
>
> Thierry,
> You cou
ner of the site, and it stopped, until this WE. So, I would
> like to ban him (they have about 10 different IP addresses hosted on
> servers from Netherland to Asia) to log into my server. I known, I can do
> it using deny from + IP in each virtual host. What I would prefer to do is
>
have about 10 different IP addresses hosted on servers from
Netherland to Asia) to log into my server. I known, I can do it using deny
from + IP in each virtual host. What I would prefer to do is deny those IP's
from the server, not from each host.My server is running etch ->
apache2.2.3
On Tue, Feb 21, 2006 at 01:13:42PM -0600, Jacob S wrote..
> > >
> > >>> 221.226.124.109 - - [20/Feb/2006:16:17:10 -0500] "GET
> > >>> http://1-shops.com/prx.php?p=q1w2e3r4t5y6u7i8o9p0*a-b HTTP/1.1"
> > >>> 404 288 "http://www.google.com/intl/en-us/"; "Mozilla/4.0
> > >>> (compatible; MSIE 6.
gives the proper
> > error code back - 404.
> >
> > I normally wouldn't worry about this, but in the last month these
> > types of entries have increased dramatically, with most of them
> > originating from IP's in China.
>
> They're looking for open pro
On 2/20/06, Kevin Coyner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 221.226.124.109 - - [20/Feb/2006:16:17:10 -0500] "GET
> http://1-shops.com/prx.php?p=q1w2e3r4t5y6u7i8o9p0*a-b HTTP/1.1" 404
> 288 "http://www.google.com/intl/en-us/"; "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible;
> MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.0; Crazy Browser 1.0.5)"
>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, 21 Feb 2006 12:03:39 -0600
Michael Schurter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Kevin Coyner wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 20, 2006 at 09:41:42PM -0600, Jacob S wrote..
> >
> >>> 221.226.124.109 - - [20/Feb/2006:16:17:10 -0500] "GET
> >>> http://1
Kevin Coyner wrote:
On Mon, Feb 20, 2006 at 09:41:42PM -0600, Jacob S wrote..
221.226.124.109 - - [20/Feb/2006:16:17:10 -0500] "GET
http://1-shops.com/prx.php?p=q1w2e3r4t5y6u7i8o9p0*a-b HTTP/1.1"
404 288 "http://www.google.com/intl/en-us/"; "Mozilla/4.0
(compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.
On Mon, Feb 20, 2006 at 09:41:42PM -0600, Jacob S wrote..
> > 221.226.124.109 - - [20/Feb/2006:16:17:10 -0500] "GET
> > http://1-shops.com/prx.php?p=q1w2e3r4t5y6u7i8o9p0*a-b HTTP/1.1"
> > 404 288 "http://www.google.com/intl/en-us/"; "Mozilla/4.0
> > (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.0; Cra
gt; error code back - 404.
>
> I normally wouldn't worry about this, but in the last month these
> types of entries have increased dramatically, with most of them
> originating from IP's in China.
They're looking for open proxies. People that are lazy in
loading/configu
er gives the proper
error code back - 404.
I normally wouldn't worry about this, but in the last month these
types of entries have increased dramatically, with most of them
originating from IP's in China.
Any thoughts would be appreciated.
Thanks
Kevin
--
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE,
e to use apt-get get get new packages and security
> updates, if there a way I can stipulate multiple ip's to one variable?
Why not save some bandwidth for yourself and the other web sites, and
simplify your firewall problems by using apt-proxy on one of the local
machines? Then all you ne
On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 01:20:47PM +0100, Mark C wrote:
> i.e I use ftp.www.mirror.ac.uk
>
> running nslookup on this gives me multiple ip addresses, I could create
> a variable for each IP, i.e
>
> APT_MIRROR_AC_UK_1="194.83.57.3"
> APT_MIRROR_AC_UK_2="194.83.57.7"
>
> and so forth, then cre
s, if there a way I can stipulate multiple ip's to one variable?
i.e I use ftp.www.mirror.ac.uk
running nslookup on this gives me multiple ip addresses, I could create
a variable for each IP, i.e
APT_MIRROR_AC_UK_1="194.83.57.3"
APT_MIRROR_AC_UK_2="194.83.57.7"
and so
>> If you needed to specify the network address of all hosts, it would take
>> the form 0.0.0.0/0.0.0.0, which I believe can be written as 0.0.0.0/0 for
>> short (please confirm this before using it).
>
> Yes, that sounds right.
ipchains also accepts 0/0. I haven't used iptables,
but I assume it
On Tue, Feb 18, 2003 at 07:05:52AM -0800, Paul Johnson wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 09:28:05PM -0600, Nathan E Norman wrote:
> > (that seems not very useful). By "deny" do you mean REJECT or DROP?
> > In any case, I _think_ the answer to your question has something to do
> > with making the de
On Tue, Feb 18, 2003 at 02:10:51PM +1100, Michael Wardle wrote:
> Would it not be easier to set the default target to DENY or REJECT?
Aww, but that would be the *easy* way...
> If you needed to specify the network address of all hosts, it would take
> the form 0.0.0.0/0.0.0.0, which I believe ca
On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 09:28:05PM -0600, Nathan E Norman wrote:
> (that seems not very useful). By "deny" do you mean REJECT or DROP?
> In any case, I _think_ the answer to your question has something to do
> with making the default policy DROP (but I'm not sure).
Though RFCs would suggest the s
On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 06:44:23PM -0800, John F. wrote:
> I would like to tell my firewall to deny all connections from any IP
> address. What would I put as the IP to be blocked?
I don't understand your question. Are you using ipchains or iptables
(kernel 2.2 or 2.4)? Are you planning on acc
On Tuesday, February 18, 2003 13:44, John F. wrote:
> I would like to tell my firewall to deny all connections from any IP
> address. What would I put as the IP to be blocked?
Would it not be easier to set the default target to DENY or REJECT?
If you needed to specify the network address of all
I would like to tell my firewall to deny all connections from any IP
address. What would I put as the IP to be blocked?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Ramon Acedo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I know that apache can manage vhosts and I could redirect to a intranet
> host all the web traffic coming to www2.mydomain.org, the same can be
> done with wu-ftp or proftp where u can have multiple domains/dubdomains
>
n would go over the 192 subnet and queries to the internet
would resolve via ns1.
justin
-Original Message-
From: Ramon Acedo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2002 6:32 AM
To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: Emulate real ip's to access intr
Em Qua, 2002-02-13 às 12:31, Ramon Acedo escreveu:
>
> Hi again!
> Thanks for your quickly answers,
>
> I think I hadn't explained enough clearly in the first mail.
> The problem is the following:
> I have a SINGLE public ip with an associated domain. In that host I have
> a DNS server, ma
Hi again!
Thanks for your quickly answers,
I think I hadn't explained enough clearly in the first mail.
The problem is the following:
I have a SINGLE public ip with an associated domain. In that host I have
a DNS server, mail server, web, etc. The important point is at the DNS.
What i'd
>I'd like to access to the hosts of my intranet with private ip's from the
>outside.
>I have the following net:
One or few weeks ago the same questions was up and the list
concluded the discussion with the result, that this best way seems to
be to ssh-portforwarding - that mean
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sunday 10 February 2002 10:39 pm, Ramon Acedo wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I'd like to access to the hosts of my intranet with private ip's from the
> outside.
> I have the following net:
>
> A real domain name server managed by
* Ramon Acedo ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [020210 14:43]:
> I just want that when someone try to access to host1.mydomain.net from the
> internet my firewall (and dns server)
> forward the request to host1.local which has the private ip 192.168.1.20.
I've thought about this problem, but I don't think ther
This one time, at band camp, Ramon Acedo said:
> Hi!
>
> I'd like to access to the hosts of my intranet with private ip's from the
> outside.
> I have the following net:
>
> A real domain name server managed by the computer which has the real ip, so
> I can
Hi!
I'd like to access to the hosts of my intranet with private ip's from the
outside.
I have the following net:
A real domain name server managed by the computer which has the real ip, so
I can set all the names and
subdomains that I need.
A firewall wich is the same host than the dn
4) then it also assigns the
> >loopback (/dev/lo) an IP (192.168.1.5). If I look at my DHCP clients
> >table on my DHCP server, it lists both IPs with the both of them
> >having the same MAC address as well. Can anyone tell me why it's
> >retrieving 2 IP
gt;loopback (/dev/lo) an IP (192.168.1.5). If I look at my DHCP clients
>table on my DHCP server, it lists both IPs with the both of them
>having the same MAC address as well. Can anyone tell me why it's
>retrieving 2 IP's? Thanks for your help,
What dhcp clie
DHCP server, it lists both IPs with the both of them having the same MAC address
as well. Can anyone tell me why it's retrieving 2 IP's? Thanks for
your help,
Aaron
On Sun, Dec 31, 2000 at 02:30:25PM -0600, Richard Cobbe wrote:
> Either way, it's still a private IP address range. NOBODY should let
> packets with one of these addresses, either as source or destination, cross
> a network boundary. If the ISP is getting this traffic from its upstrea
> provider,
Looks like HP OpenView or some other network management tool with
auto-discovery turned on is wasting bandwidth on your corporate network.
(And I say that because...)
161 is SNMP's port number.
It's happening at regular intervals.
172.16.0.0/20 is private address space reserved
On Sun, Dec 31, 2000 at 08:32:48PM -0600, Richard Cobbe wrote:
> Uh oh. And you're still getting these log messages? That's probably not
> good. It's possible that lsof could slip through the cracks, so to speak,
> but it's pretty unlikely.
>
> > Just yesterday I got another machine connected t
On Sun, Dec 31, 2000 at 08:32:48PM -0600, Richard Cobbe wrote:
> Lo, on Sunday, December 31, JD Kitch did write:
>
> > > Now, find out *who's* sending this traffic. Make sure you've got the
> > > lsof-2.2 package installed. As root, run
> > >
> > > lsof | grep 61662 | grep -i udp
> >
> > I do
On Tue, Jan 02, 2001 at 02:09:20AM -0600, will trillich wrote:
> i've got something quite similar to this, but mine's on INPUT--
>
> Jan 2 01:18:48 server kernel: Packet log: input DENY eth0 PROTO=1
> 172.156.51.114:10 224.0.0.2:0 L=28 S=0x00 I=8964 F=0x T=128 (#9)
> Jan 2 01:18:51 server k
On Sun, Dec 31, 2000 at 05:25:54PM -0600, Richard Cobbe wrote:
> JD Kitch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Can anyone tell me what this person is looking for here, and how I
> > can find out where this is coming from?
> >
> > Security Violations
> > =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
> > Dec 31 11:06:47 tower kern
Lo, on Sunday, December 31, JD Kitch did write:
> > Now, find out *who's* sending this traffic. Make sure you've got the
> > lsof-2.2 package installed. As root, run
> >
> > lsof | grep 61662 | grep -i udp
>
> I do have that package, but this command turned up no output.
Uh oh. And you're st
On Sun, Dec 31, 2000 at 06:20:50PM -0700, John Galt wrote:
> You are forbidden from posting for the rest of the millenium. Since it's
> 6pm MST on the eve of the millennium, this shouldn't be too hard :)
Punishment accepted.
See youse all next year!
--
Bob Bernstein
at
Esmond, Rhode Island,
You are forbidden from posting for the rest of the millenium. Since it's
6pm MST on the eve of the millennium, this shouldn't be too hard :)
On Sun, 31 Dec 2000, Bob Bernstein wrote:
> *** Retraction ***
>
> On Sun, Dec 31, 2000 at 03:36:13PM -0500, Bob Bernstein wrote:
>
> > What I gather i
On Sun, 31 Dec 2000 17:17:46 -0700, JD Kitch said:
> > Now, find out *who's* sending this traffic. Make sure you've got the
> > lsof-2.2 package installed. As root, run
> >
> > lsof | grep 61662 | grep -i udp
>
> I do have that package, but this command turned up no output.
You did thi
On Sun, Dec 31, 2000 at 04:18:30PM -0600, Richard Cobbe wrote:
> JD Kitch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Security Violations
> > =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
> > Dec 31 11:06:47 tower kernel: Packet log: output REJECT eth0 PROTO=17
> > xx.xx.xxx.xx:61662 172.16.72.113:161 L=106 S=0x00 I=7632 F=0x T=127
JD Kitch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Can anyone tell me what this person is looking for here, and how I
> can find out where this is coming from?
>
> Security Violations
> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
> Dec 31 11:06:47 tower kernel: Packet log: output REJECT eth0 PROTO=17
> xx.xx.xxx.xx:61662 172.16.72.
On Sun, Dec 31, 2000 at 03:36:13PM -0500, Bob Bernstein wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 31, 2000 at 12:16:59PM -0700, JD Kitch wrote:
>
> > Dec 31 11:06:47 tower kernel: Packet log: output REJECT eth0 PROTO=17
> > xx.xx.xxx.xx:61662 172.16.72.113:161 L=106 S=0x00 I=7632 F=0x T=127
> > (#43)
>
> I don'
*** Retraction ***
On Sun, Dec 31, 2000 at 03:36:13PM -0500, Bob Bernstein wrote:
> What I gather is that this could be a student at isi.edu, which is
> apparently part of the Univ. of California,
File this message under: Big Dummy Posts We Wish We Never Made
It's all brain-dead nonsense, based
on Sun, Dec 31, 2000 at 12:16:59PM -0700, JD Kitch ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Can anyone tell me what this person is looking for here, and how I
> can find out where this is coming from?
traceroute
--
Karsten M. Self http://kmself.home.netcom.com/
Evangelist, Zelerate, Inc.
On Sun, Dec 31, 2000 at 12:16:59PM -0700, JD Kitch wrote:
> Dec 31 11:06:47 tower kernel: Packet log: output REJECT eth0 PROTO=17
> xx.xx.xxx.xx:61662 172.16.72.113:161 L=106 S=0x00 I=7632 F=0x T=127 (#43)
I don't know what tool generated this log entry. This is a situation where a
good IDS
Lo, on Sunday, December 31, Pollywog did write:
>
> On Sun, 31 Dec 2000 13:55:26 -0600 (CST), Richard Cobbe said:
>
> >
> > Did you change your IP address in the above report? IIRC, 172.16.*.* is
> > a block of private addresses. Packets to this address should be dropped
> > automatically b
Lo, on Sunday, December 31, ktb did write:
> On Sun, Dec 31, 2000 at 12:16:59PM -0700, JD Kitch wrote:
> > Security Violations
> > =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
> > Dec 31 11:06:47 tower kernel: Packet log: output REJECT eth0 PROTO=17
> > xx.xx.xxx.xx:61662 172.16.72.113:161 L=106 S=0x00 I=7632 F=0x T=
On Sun, 31 Dec 2000 13:55:26 -0600 (CST), Richard Cobbe said:
>
> Did you change your IP address in the above report? IIRC, 172.16.*.* is
> a block of private addresses. Packets to this address should be dropped
> automatically by an upstream router. My guess, therefore, is that these
> tr
On Sun, 31 Dec 2000 13:34:02 -0600, ktb said:
> On Sun, Dec 31, 2000 at 12:16:59PM -0700, JD Kitch wrote:
> > Can anyone tell me what this person is looking for here, and how I
> > can find out where this is coming from?
> >
> > Security Violations
> > =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
> > Dec 31 11:06:
On Sun, 31 Dec 2000 12:16:59 MST, JD Kitch writes:
>Can anyone tell me what this person is looking for here, and how I
>can find out where this is coming from?
port 161 is snmp, so it looks like someone´s trying to get information
about your machine (or something at your ISP or the like is
mis
Lo, on Sunday, December 31, JD Kitch did write:
> Can anyone tell me what this person is looking for here, and how I
> can find out where this is coming from?
>
> Security Violations
> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
> Dec 31 11:06:47 tower kernel: Packet log: output REJECT eth0 PROTO=17
> xx.xx.xxx.xx:6166
whois 172.16.72.113
IANA (IANA-BBLK-RESERVED)
Internet Assigned Numbers Authority
Information Sciences Institute
University of Southern California
4676 Admiralty Way, Suite 330
Marina del Rey, CA 90292-6695
Netname: IANA-BBLK-RESERVED
Netblock: 172.16.0.0 - 172.31.0.0
from wh
On Sun, Dec 31, 2000 at 12:16:59PM -0700, JD Kitch wrote:
> Can anyone tell me what this person is looking for here, and how I
> can find out where this is coming from?
>
> Security Violations
> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
> Dec 31 11:06:47 tower kernel: Packet log: output REJECT eth0 PROTO=17
> xx.xx.xx
Can anyone tell me what this person is looking for here, and how I
can find out where this is coming from?
Security Violations
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Dec 31 11:06:47 tower kernel: Packet log: output REJECT eth0 PROTO=17
xx.xx.xxx.xx:61662 172.16.72.113:161 L=106 S=0x00 I=7632 F=0x T=127 (#43)
De
gt; Oki DZ wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 5 May 2000, Wayne Sitton wrote:
> >
> > > How do I bind 2 ip's to the same nic in Debian
> > >
John P.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.mdt.net.au/~john Debian Linux admin & support:technical services
May 2000, Wayne Sitton wrote:
>
> > How do I bind 2 ip's to the same nic in Debian
> >
> > I've tried
> > ifconfig eth0:1 xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx up
> > ifconfig eth0:2 XXX.XXX.XXX.XXY up
> >
> > is there something I'm forgeting?
>
> ifconfig
On Fri, 5 May 2000, Jay Barbee wrote:
> On Fri, May 05, 2000 at 12:52:48PM -0500, Wayne Sitton wrote:
> > how do I enable ip aliasing
>
> you need to make you kernel and have
> CONFIG_IP_ALIAS=y
> in the 'make config'.
"have and make your kernel?" :-)
Oki
ps: no nitpick intended
pps: long a
On Fri, 5 May 2000, Wayne Sitton wrote:
> How do I bind 2 ip's to the same nic in Debian
>
> I've tried
> ifconfig eth0:1 xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx up
> ifconfig eth0:2 XXX.XXX.XXX.XXY up
>
> is there something I'm forgeting?
ifconfig eth0:1 xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx netmask
> > how do I enable ip aliasing?
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Wayne Sitton
> > > How do I bind 2 ip's to the same nic in Debian
> > >
> > enable ip aliasing in the kernel.
> > then do:
> > ifconfig eth0 ip1/mask [fo
ing?
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Oswald Buddenhagen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, May 05, 2000 12:44 PM
> To: Wayne Sitton
> Cc: debian-user@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: virtual ip's
>
>
> > How do I bind 2 ip's to the same nic in Debian
>
On Fri, May 05, 2000 at 12:52:48PM -0500, Wayne Sitton wrote:
> how do I enable ip aliasing
you need to make you kernel and have
CONFIG_IP_ALIAS=y
in the 'make config'.
If you are totally lost view the Kernel HOWTO:
http://www.linuxdoc.org/HOWTO/Kernel-HOWTO.html
--Jay Barbee
how do I enable ip aliasing?
-Original Message-
From: Oswald Buddenhagen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, May 05, 2000 12:44 PM
To: Wayne Sitton
Cc: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: virtual ip's
> How do I bind 2 ip's to the same nic in Debian
>
enable ip
> How do I bind 2 ip's to the same nic in Debian
>
enable ip aliasing in the kernel.
then do:
ifconfig eth0 ip1/mask [foo...]
ifconfig eth0:1 ip2/mask [bar...]
--
Hi! I'm a .signature virus! Copy me into your ~/.signature, please!
--
Linux - the last service pack you'll ever need.
How do I bind 2 ip's to the same nic in Debian
I've tried
ifconfig eth0:1 xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx up
ifconfig eth0:2 XXX.XXX.XXX.XXY up
is there something I'm forgeting?
Wayne
Ethan Benson wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I have a small network connected to the internet via a IP masq
> gateway, and would like to get mail working, but the above setup is a
> nightmare for mail it would seem.
>
> is it even possible for mail to work in such a setup or am i wasting
> my time? I got th
On 2000-01-25 01:29:55, Ethan Benson wrote:
> I have a small network connected to the internet via a IP masq
> gateway, and would like to get mail working, but the above setup is a
> nightmare for mail it would seem.
Why? Sounds like mail masq'ing.
> is it even possible for mail to work in su
Hi,
I have a small network connected to the internet via a IP masq
gateway, and would like to get mail working, but the above setup is a
nightmare for mail it would seem.
is it even possible for mail to work in such a setup or am i wasting
my time? I got the gateway machine to send mail, bu
Bill Bell writes:
> I want to get to the management utility on the bridge without
> broadcasting the bridges management IP on the Internet.
Why do you think your bridge will do this?
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Hasler)
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, WI
On 19-Feb-99 Bill Bell wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Is it possible, and if so how, to support two IP's on a single
> interface card? I thought I have seen this somewhere.
>
It is called IP aliasing.
Read the IP Aliasing Howto and it will explain how this is done.
--
Andrew
Hello,
Is it possible, and if so how, to support two IP's on a single
interface card? I thought I have seen this somewhere.
I am trying to put a 192.168.2.x on my eth1 which is the same
interface that connects to my bridge and my Internet connection.
I want to get to the management utili
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Daniel Martin at cush) writes:
> However, if smail is handed a from address (either by the SMTP "MAIL
> FROM:" command or by the "-f" or "-r" option to the senmail command),
> smail will use that address. Therefore it may be perfectly possible
> to convince your MUA to hand sma
Bob Hilliard writes:
> It should be possible to make any other MUA put a proper From: field in
> the mail they send to smail.
That isn't the problem. It is the MAIL FROM address in the smtp
transaction that causes difficulty. BrightNet refuses my mail if this
address is not in their domain (even
John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I've found that it is sufficient to set visible_name to the host part of my
> popmail address. That is, my email address at BrightNet is
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] so I put visible_name=win.bright.net in
> smail/config. This gets my mail out past their anti-spam-
Daniel Martin writes:
> One thing I'm also doing is rewriting my smail config file each time ppp
> goes up so that my visible_name is set to the current value
> (e.g. ppp75.hcf.jhu.edu); this value is also stored in /etc/mailname.
I've found that it is sufficient to set visible_name to the host pa
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Lee Bradshaw) writes:
> Well thanks to help from Art, Carey, Daniel, and Martin I think we have
> the problem narrowed down to the envelope sender (MAIL FROM: in the
> SMTP dialog). If I connect to the mail server with telnet as Carey
> suggested, everything is fine. Netscape
I am not sure whether this can help you at all (or whether it has been
brougth up before), but the following hack, posted to a debian list a
long time ago, works for me in rewriting headers with smail.
I am using my university account to connect to the internet, and I
want all replies (regardless
Hi,
Well thanks to help from Art, Carey, Daniel, and Martin I think we have
the problem narrowed down to the envelope sender (MAIL FROM: in the
SMTP dialog). If I connect to the mail server with telnet as Carey
suggested, everything is fine. Netscape also has no problem generating
mail with the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Lee Bradshaw) writes:
> David in another message you were suggesting I not use the "from " line.
> Do you know how to turn it off? I haven't found any way to control
> this line -- smail seems to generate this line as Carey describes for
> sendmail.
(This isn't quite what you'
1 - 100 of 119 matches
Mail list logo
