On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 07:32:48AM +0200, Erwan David wrote:
> Le Sun 27/06/2010, lee disait
> > On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 08:14:07PM +0200, Erwan David wrote:
> > > Le Sat 26/06/2010, lee disait
> > > > On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 07:24:55PM +0200, Erwan David wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > receiving direc
Le Sun 27/06/2010, lee disait
> On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 08:14:07PM +0200, Erwan David wrote:
> > Le Sat 26/06/2010, lee disait
> > > On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 07:24:55PM +0200, Erwan David wrote:
> > > >
> > > > receiving directly needs a MX record, which needs a static IP because
> > > > of DNS ca
On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 08:14:07PM +0200, Erwan David wrote:
> Le Sat 26/06/2010, lee disait
> > On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 07:24:55PM +0200, Erwan David wrote:
> > >
> > > receiving directly needs a MX record, which needs a static IP because of
> > > DNS caches
> >
> > If you use dyndns, they set
lee wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 07:08:14PM +0200, Merciadri Luca wrote:
>
>> lee wrote:
>>
>>> * unplug the router, plug your computer directly into the modem, set
>>> up your computer for making the connection to your ISP
>>>
>>>
>> Everything works great, if so.
>>
>
>
Erwan David wrote:
> Le Sat 26/06/2010, lee disait
>
>> On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 01:54:17AM +1000, Andrew McGlashan wrote:
>>
>>> Umm, to run a proper mail server, you wouldn't and probably
>>> shouldn't be able to use a dynamic IP.
>>>
>>> The MX record for mail must have a "real" A record
Le Sat 26/06/2010, lee disait
> On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 07:24:55PM +0200, Erwan David wrote:
> >
> > receiving directly needs a MX record, which needs a static IP because of
> > DNS caches
>
> If you use dyndns, they set the ttl to one minute.
Some resolvers have a minimum caching bigger than t
On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 07:08:14PM +0200, Merciadri Luca wrote:
> lee wrote:
> > * unplug the router, plug your computer directly into the modem, set
> > up your computer for making the connection to your ISP
> >
> Everything works great, if so.
That might indicate that the router is causing tr
On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 07:24:55PM +0200, Erwan David wrote:
>
> receiving directly needs a MX record, which needs a static IP because of DNS
> caches
If you use dyndns, they set the ttl to one minute.
> You may get what you want if you find a service provider which
> provides UUCP or ETRN for
Le Sat 26/06/2010, lee disait
> On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 01:54:17AM +1000, Andrew McGlashan wrote:
> >
> > Umm, to run a proper mail server, you wouldn't and probably
> > shouldn't be able to use a dynamic IP.
> >
> > The MX record for mail must have a "real" A record that has a fixed
> > IP; and
green wrote:
> lee wrote at 2010-06-26 09:28 -0500:
>
>
>
>
> Someone mentioned DD-WRT; that would probably be a good thing to try IF your
> router is supported. My experience with routers suggests that usually a
> router's software is more of a problem than the hardware.
>
> http://www.dd
lee wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 09:11:11AM +0200, Merciadri Luca wrote:
>
>
> To figure this out, it's a good idea to simplify things first:
>
>
> * use static IPs on all the computers connected to the LAN and turn
> off the DHCP server in the router if possible
>
> * connect the switch to
On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 01:54:17AM +1000, Andrew McGlashan wrote:
>
> Umm, to run a proper mail server, you wouldn't and probably
> shouldn't be able to use a dynamic IP.
>
> The MX record for mail must have a "real" A record that has a fixed
> IP; and that A record's IP should have a proper reve
Hi,
lee wrote:
See if the problem persists. If it does, replace the modem. Installing
squid on your computer and configuring shorewall so that your computer
acts as a transparent proxy for all the computers on your LAN is a
good idea. You might want to go further and set up your computer to
prov
lee wrote at 2010-06-26 09:28 -0500:
> On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 09:11:11AM +0200, Merciadri Luca wrote:
> > According to my pings (see last messages), the router looks like
> > overwhelmed, and is thus completely crappy. I don't know why it happens
> > now. I am still wondering why.
> DHCP with the
On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 09:11:11AM +0200, Merciadri Luca wrote:
> >
> According to my pings (see last messages), the router looks like
> overwhelmed, and is thus completely crappy. I don't know why it happens
> now. I am still wondering why.
To figure this out, it's a good idea to simplify thin
Andrew McGlashan wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, June 26, 2010 5:10 pm, Merciadri Luca wrote:
>
>>> Well if you have a LAN port from the modem to the "switch", then you
>>> connect PCs to the switch -- one of them can do a PPPoE login (not
>>> PPPoA) and only that one machine will be on the Internet.
>
Hi,
On Sat, June 26, 2010 5:10 pm, Merciadri Luca wrote:
>> Well if you have a LAN port from the modem to the "switch", then you
>> connect PCs to the switch -- one of them can do a PPPoE login (not
>> PPPoA) and only that one machine will be on the Internet.
> You mean that if some WAN is connect
H.S. wrote:
> On 25/06/10 06:07 PM, Merciadri Luca wrote:
>
>> H.S. wrote:
>>
>>> On 06/25/10 14:44, vr wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Mac address is usually an issue in cable internet connections. In any
>>> case, router/modems usually have a feature called "clone mac address"
>>> exactly for this
Andrew McGlashan wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Well if you have a LAN port from the modem to the "switch", then you
> connect PCs to the switch -- one of them can do a PPPoE login (not
> PPPoA) and only that one machine will be on the Internet.
You mean that if some WAN is connected directly to the switch (!=
r
Greg Madden wrote:
> On my router the firmware from the vendor didn't work reliably , the update
> did not fix the issue, 'DD-WRT' fixed the issue.
>
> Or something similar.
>
> http://www.dd-wrt.com/site/index
>
Ok, thanks. I have fresh news. It just stalled, and I tried to ping it:
==
$ p
Klistvud wrote:
> Good point. Add a squid proxy/cache to it, and you've just increased
> the perceived Internet bandwidth of your LAN by anywhere from 10 to
> 25% or more. At absolutely no cost. Ah, the joys of DIY ...
True, but you have, by the same means, also increased your electricity bill!
--
Alan Chandler wrote:
> On 25/06/10 23:34, John Hasler wrote:
>> Merciadri Luca writes:
>>> ...what else can you buy if you need to connect>4 computers?
>>
>> Put 2 NICs in an old pc and install Debian. It'll outperform any
>> consumer-grade router on the market. Buy a switch to connect all your
>
On 25/06/10 06:07 PM, Merciadri Luca wrote:
> H.S. wrote:
>> On 06/25/10 14:44, vr wrote:
>>
>>
>> Mac address is usually an issue in cable internet connections. In any
>> case, router/modems usually have a feature called "clone mac address"
>> exactly for this kind of situation, it clones the m
Hi,
Klistvud wrote:
Dne, 25. 06. 2010 21:24:29 je Merciadri Luca napisal(a):
The problem is that my switch does not have any WAN port!
IIRC switches don't need one, as they juggle packets based on hardware
(MAC) addresses. But then again, I've been wrong before ...
Well if you have a LAN
On 25/06/10 23:34, John Hasler wrote:
Merciadri Luca writes:
...what else can you buy if you need to connect>4 computers?
Put 2 NICs in an old pc and install Debian. It'll outperform any
consumer-grade router on the market. Buy a switch to connect all your
computers.
Until November last yea
Dne, 26. 06. 2010 00:34:39 je John Hasler napisal(a):
Put 2 NICs in an old pc and install Debian. It'll outperform any
consumer-grade router on the market. Buy a switch to connect all your
computers.
Good point. Add a squid proxy/cache to it, and you've just increased
the perceived Interne
On Friday 25 June 2010 11:26:22 Merciadri Luca wrote:
> Arthur Machlas wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 12:40 PM, Arthur Machlas
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> > Silly me, sent before I was done pontificating. Also wanted to add
> > that you should check your router for the latest firmware updates,
> > mo
Merciadri Luca writes:
> ...what else can you buy if you need to connect >4 computers?
Put 2 NICs in an old pc and install Debian. It'll outperform any
consumer-grade router on the market. Buy a switch to connect all your
computers.
--
John Hasler
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-req
Arthur Machlas wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 3:30 PM, Celejar wrote:
>
>
> My ISP provided me with a "router" / modem, however the router is of
> the extremely handicapped variety. Thus, I had to go into the
> interface of the router/modem and tell it to act only as a gateway.
> The only dev
H.S. wrote:
> On 06/25/10 14:44, vr wrote:
>
>
> Mac address is usually an issue in cable internet connections. In any
> case, router/modems usually have a feature called "clone mac address"
> exactly for this kind of situation, it clones the mac address of your
> hardware and shows that mac add
John Hasler wrote:
> Merciadri Luca writes:
>
>
> Their modem knows it: it's connected to your router via ethernet.
>
Well, I had forgotten this. Thanks for pointing this out.
--
Merciadri Luca
See http://www.student.montefiore.ulg.ac.be/~merciadri/
I use PGP. If there is an incompatibility
On 06/25/10 14:44, vr wrote:
> On 6/25/2010 5:57 AM, Merciadri Luca wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> For one week now, I sometimes `loose' any access to the LAN and the WAN.
>> Here is the way I am connected to the Internet:
>>
>> ISP (house's wall) -> ISP modem (RJ-45) -> D-Link DIR-635 router
>> (RJ-45)
>>
On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 3:30 PM, Celejar wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Jun 2010 15:53:09 -0400
> vr wrote:
>
>> On 6/25/2010 3:27 PM, Merciadri Luca wrote:
>> > Might be that, but how could my ISP guess that I'm using a router?
>> >
>>
>> The first few characters of a MAC address are registered to a compan
On Fri, 25 Jun 2010 15:53:09 -0400
vr wrote:
> On 6/25/2010 3:27 PM, Merciadri Luca wrote:
> > Might be that, but how could my ISP guess that I'm using a router?
> >
>
> The first few characters of a MAC address are registered to a company.
True, but many companies make both routers and regular
Merciadri Luca writes:
> Sure, but are you sure that they can know the router's MAC address?
Their modem knows it: it's connected to your router via ethernet.
--
John Hasler
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact list
On 6/25/2010 3:53 PM, Merciadri Luca wrote:
vr wrote:
On 6/25/2010 3:27 PM, Merciadri Luca wrote:
The first few characters of a MAC address are registered to a company.
Sure, but are you sure that they can know the router's MAC address?
Yes, your device is physically attached to their netw
Dne, 25. 06. 2010 21:24:29 je Merciadri Luca napisal(a):
The problem is that my switch does not have any WAN port!
IIRC switches don't need one, as they juggle packets based on hardware
(MAC) addresses. But then again, I've been wrong before ...
--
Regards,
Klistvud
Certifiable Loonix Us
vr wrote:
> On 6/25/2010 3:27 PM, Merciadri Luca wrote:
>
> The first few characters of a MAC address are registered to a company.
Sure, but are you sure that they can know the router's MAC address?
--
Merciadri Luca
See http://www.student.montefiore.ulg.ac.be/~merciadri/
I use PGP. If there is a
On 6/25/2010 3:27 PM, Merciadri Luca wrote:
Might be that, but how could my ISP guess that I'm using a router?
The first few characters of a MAC address are registered to a company.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Co
vr wrote:
> On 6/25/2010 5:57 AM, Merciadri Luca wrote:
> [snip]
>
> Does your ISP claim to disallow routers or possibly charge extra for
> multiple PC's? Might be time to input your PC's MAC in the MAC
> spoofing section of your router.
>
>
Might be that, but how could my ISP guess that I'm using
Arthur Machlas wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 12:40 PM, Arthur Machlas
> wrote:
>
>
> Silly me, sent before I was done pontificating. Also wanted to add
> that you should check your router for the latest firmware updates,
> most residential routers are rushed out the door fugees style (ready
Arthur Machlas wrote:
> What's the point of the switch in your setup?
>
All my router's ports are occupied by other RJ-45 cables, linked to
other computers. So, a switch is connected to one LAN port of the
router, and this computer is connected to the switch.
--
Merciadri Luca
See http://www.s
Klistvud wrote:
> Dne, 25. 06. 2010 14:09:27 je Merciadri Luca napisal(a):
>
>
> I'd have to agree with Camaleon on that. One thing you could try
> before actually *replacing* the router is just disconnect it and
> connect directly through the switch (seeing you have one in your
> setup). Of course
On 6/25/2010 5:57 AM, Merciadri Luca wrote:
Hi,
For one week now, I sometimes `loose' any access to the LAN and the WAN.
Here is the way I am connected to the Internet:
ISP (house's wall) -> ISP modem (RJ-45) -> D-Link DIR-635 router (RJ-45)
-> Switch (RJ-45) -> 192.168.0.101 (this computer
On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 12:40 PM, Arthur Machlas
wrote:
> What's the point of the switch in your setup?
>
Silly me, sent before I was done pontificating. Also wanted to add
that you should check your router for the latest firmware updates,
most residential routers are rushed out the door fugees s
What's the point of the switch in your setup?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
http://lists.debian.org/aanlkting9j_ddfimq5ehoejn76rlaf-zg5xmf-hbp...@mail.gmail.com
Dne, 25. 06. 2010 14:09:27 je Merciadri Luca napisal(a):
> If so, first step I'd try to change/replace is the router.
>
Well, okay, I'll try it. But no other clue? Thanks.
I'd have to agree with Camaleon on that. One thing you could try before
actually *replacing* the router is just disconn
On Fri, 25 Jun 2010 16:47:43 +0200, Merciadri Luca wrote:
> Camaleón wrote:
>>> Okay. But then, how would you explain the modem LEDs to be constantly
>>> lighted when nothing works?
>>>
>>>
>> It can be receiving traffic from the ISP itself (assigning
>> IP/DNS/gateway data to the devic
On 06/25/10 05:57, Merciadri Luca wrote:
> Hi,
>
> For one week now, I sometimes `loose' any access to the LAN and the WAN.
> Here is the way I am connected to the Internet:
>
> ISP (house's wall) -> ISP modem (RJ-45) -> D-Link DIR-635 router (RJ-45)
> -> Switch (RJ-45) -> 192.168.0.101 (this com
Camaleón wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Jun 2010 16:00:26 +0200, Merciadri Luca wrote:
>
>
>> Camaleón wrote:
>>
>
>
>>> I am not familiar with you setup as I use "all-in-one" devices (ADSL
>>> bundled modem-router) and in my case, yes, sometimes the modem-router
>>> gets "stuck" and I have to powe
On Fri, 25 Jun 2010 16:00:26 +0200, Merciadri Luca wrote:
> Camaleón wrote:
>> I am not familiar with you setup as I use "all-in-one" devices (ADSL
>> bundled modem-router) and in my case, yes, sometimes the modem-router
>> gets "stuck" and I have to powercycle the device to get it operative
>> a
green wrote:
> Merciadri Luca wrote at 2010-06-25 04:57 -0500:
>
>
> You've probably already checked this, but is the switch connected to a LAN
> port
> on the router and the modem connected to the WAN port? If the modem were
> connected to a LAN port, then that puts 2 DHCP servers on one ne
Camaleón wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Jun 2010 14:09:27 +0200, Merciadri Luca wrote:
>
>
>
> Good.
>
>
>
> After reading your comments, it seems to be a problem within the router
> (you said that "sometines" you cannot reach the web interface and that is
> a bad signal). And as router is the "glue"
Merciadri Luca wrote at 2010-06-25 04:57 -0500:
> For one week now, I sometimes `loose' any access to the LAN and the WAN.
> Here is the way I am connected to the Internet:
>
> ISP (house's wall) -> ISP modem (RJ-45) -> D-Link DIR-635 router (RJ-45)
> -> Switch (RJ-45) -> 192.168.0.101 (this compu
Anand Sivaram wrote:
> Do you have lights (led light) for each of your rj45 ports? Have you
> seen the output of them when you say that you can not access your
> router/other computers?
Yes. LEDs are still ok when this happens.
> Try installing "ethtool" on your debian and see "ethtool eth0" (or
>
On Fri, 25 Jun 2010 14:09:27 +0200, Merciadri Luca wrote:
> Camaleón wrote:
>> On Fri, 25 Jun 2010 11:57:40 +0200, Merciadri Luca wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> (...)
>>
>> I suppose you are using a wifi setup with at least WPA2-PSK (or AES) so
>> we can discard any intruder making "bad things" in your net
On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 17:39, Merciadri Luca <
luca.mercia...@student.ulg.ac.be> wrote:
> Camaleón wrote:
> > On Fri, 25 Jun 2010 11:57:40 +0200, Merciadri Luca wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > (...)
> >
> > I suppose you are using a wifi setup with at least WPA2-PSK (or AES) so
> > we can discard any intr
Camaleón wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Jun 2010 11:57:40 +0200, Merciadri Luca wrote:
>
>
>
> (...)
>
> I suppose you are using a wifi setup with at least WPA2-PSK (or AES) so
> we can discard any intruder making "bad things" in your network >:-)
>
I am not connecting with WiFi (as stated in my previ
On Fri, 25 Jun 2010 11:57:40 +0200, Merciadri Luca wrote:
> For one week now, I sometimes `loose' any access to the LAN and the WAN.
> Here is the way I am connected to the Internet:
>
> ISP (house's wall) -> ISP modem (RJ-45) -> D-Link DIR-635 router (RJ-45)
> -> Switch (RJ-45) -> 192.168.0.101
59 matches
Mail list logo
