On 27/08/14, Reco (recovery...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Aug 2014 23:12:05 +0100
> "Karl E. Jorgensen" wrote:
>
> > > > 4) sysctl --system
> > > sysctl --system
> > > * Applying /etc/sysctl.d/99-sysctl.conf ...
> > > net.ipv4.icmp_echo_ignore_all = 0
> > > net.ipv4.icmp_echo_ignore_broadcast
On 26/08/14, Karl E. Jorgensen (k...@jorgensen.org.uk) wrote:
> > sysctl --system
> > * Applying /etc/sysctl.d/99-sysctl.conf ...
> > net.ipv4.icmp_echo_ignore_all = 0
> > net.ipv4.icmp_echo_ignore_broadcasts = 0
>
> These caught my eye: Ignore all ICMP ? That would stop ping
> (a.k.a. ICMP echo)
Hi.
On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 00:27:24 +0100
Brian wrote:
> On Wed 27 Aug 2014 at 02:01:14 +0400, Reco wrote:
>
> > And, by the way, ipv6 has nothing to do with this problem, although the
> > output of ipv6 routing tables looks abnormal to me too.
>
> You could very well be correct. But, should the
Hi.
On Tue, 26 Aug 2014 23:12:05 +0100
"Karl E. Jorgensen" wrote:
> > > 4) sysctl --system
> > sysctl --system
> > * Applying /etc/sysctl.d/99-sysctl.conf ...
> > net.ipv4.icmp_echo_ignore_all = 0
> > net.ipv4.icmp_echo_ignore_broadcasts = 0
>
> These caught my eye: Ignore all ICMP ? That woul
On Wed 27 Aug 2014 at 02:01:14 +0400, Reco wrote:
> And, by the way, ipv6 has nothing to do with this problem, although the
> output of ipv6 routing tables looks abnormal to me too.
You could very well be correct. But, should the OP decide to continue
without ipv6, he may find systemd to be unfor
Hi
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 03:50:25PM -0400, John wrote:
> On 25/08/14, Reco (recovery...@gmail.com) wrote:
>
> > Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2014 22:13:41 +0400
> > From: Reco
> > To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
> > Subject: Re: No localhost - I'm stumped
> > X-
Hi.
On Tue, 26 Aug 2014 15:50:25 -0400
John wrote:
> -A POSTROUTING -j MASQUERADE
This is the source of your trouble. You're redirecting packets intended
to go via loopback to nat with this rule, which is obviously wrong.
I suggest you to try this rule instead:
iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING
On Tue 26 Aug 2014 at 15:50:25 -0400, John wrote:
> On 25/08/14, Reco (recovery...@gmail.com) wrote:
> >
> > 3) strace ping6 -c2 ip6-localhost
>
> I've left this one out, since I recompiled the kernel without ip6
> support. "ping6 localhost" had produced a result and my thinking was
> to force
On 25/08/14, Reco (recovery...@gmail.com) wrote:
> Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2014 22:13:41 +0400
> From: Reco
> To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: No localhost - I'm stumped
> X-Spam-Status: No, score=-11.2 required=4.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,
> DKIM
Hi.
On Mon, 25 Aug 2014 12:09:59 -0400
John wrote:
> Thanks for the help and the link; it's useful. But alas, nothing from it s=
> olved my problem. I think next I'll try reinstalling stuff -- cups, hplip,=
> anything else that comes to mind -- and see if I blunder into a fix.
Probably won'
On Aug 25, 2014 7:30 PM, "John" wrote:
>
> On 24/08/14, Curt (cu...@free.fr) wrote:
> > On 2014-08-24, John wrote:
> > >
> > > I've tried everything I can think of, and hints regarding what to try
next
> > > would be higholy welcome.
> >
> > Some things to try here:
> >
> >
http://unix.stackexcha
On 24/08/14, Curt (cu...@free.fr) wrote:
> On 2014-08-24, John wrote:
> >
> > I've tried everything I can think of, and hints regarding what to try next
> > would be higholy welcome.
>
> Some things to try here:
>
> http://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/26487/can-ping-any-hosts-but-localhost-w
On Sun 24 Aug 2014 at 13:43:25 -0400, John wrote:
> For some days now, localhost has not responded to anything. I've tried
> everything, and am stumped. Here are a few indications:
>
> netstat -an |grep 631
> tcp0 0 127.0.0.1:631 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN
> tcp
On 2014-08-24, John wrote:
>
>
> I've tried everything I can think of, and hints regarding what to try next
> would be higholy welcome.
>
Some things to try here:
http://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/26487/can-ping-any-hosts-but-localhost-whats-wrong
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user
For some days now, localhost has not responded to anything. I've tried
everything, and am stumped. Here are a few indications:
ifconfig shows lo is working:
loLink encap:Local Loopback
inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0
inet6 addr: ::1/128 Scope:Host
UP LO
15 matches
Mail list logo