On 09/02/2018 03:22 PM, mick crane wrote:
On 2018-09-02 19:39, David Christensen wrote:
On 09/02/2018 05:48 AM, mick crane wrote:
On 2018-09-02 13:16, Stephen P. Molnar wrote:
The Firewall Passthrough is set to Allocation Mode set to 'Passthrough
with the Passthrough Mode set to 'DHCPS-dynami
On 2018-09-02 19:39, David Christensen wrote:
On 09/02/2018 05:48 AM, mick crane wrote:
On 2018-09-02 13:16, Stephen P. Molnar wrote:
The Firewall Passthrough is set to Allocation Mode set to
'Passthrough
with the Passthrough Mode set to 'DHCPS-dynamic '.
It's my intention to change the Allo
On 09/02/2018 05:48 AM, mick crane wrote:
On 2018-09-02 13:16, Stephen P. Molnar wrote:
The Firewall Passthrough is set to Allocation Mode set to 'Passthrough
with the Passthrough Mode set to 'DHCPS-dynamic '.
It's my intention to change the Allocation Mode to 'Off', as soon as I
talk to AT&T
On 2018-09-02 13:16, Stephen P. Molnar wrote:
The Firewall Passthrough is set to Allocation Mode set to 'Passthrough
with the Passthrough Mode set to 'DHCPS-dynamic '.
It's my intention to change the Allocation Mode to 'Off', as soon as I
talk to AT&T Tech Support to make sure that doesn't mess
On 09/02/2018 01:37 AM, David Christensen wrote:
On 09/01/2018 04:05 AM, Stephen P. Molnar wrote:
On 08/31/2018 10:41 PM, David Christensen wrote:
On 08/31/2018 12:50 PM, Stephen P. Molnar wrote:
I am running Debian Stretch on my Linux platform.
I have noticed low internet traffic when I
On 09/01/2018 04:05 AM, Stephen P. Molnar wrote:
On 08/31/2018 10:41 PM, David Christensen wrote:
On 08/31/2018 12:50 PM, Stephen P. Molnar wrote:
I am running Debian Stretch on my Linux platform.
I have noticed low internet traffic when I have not been doing
anything outside of my LAN. Th
On Saturday, September 01, 2018 11:59:27 AM Stephen P. Molnar wrote:
> On 09/01/2018 08:26 AM, rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Saturday, September 01, 2018 07:05:55 AM Stephen P. Molnar wrote:
> >> On 08/31/2018 10:41 PM, David Christensen wrote:
> >>> On 08/31/2018 12:50 PM, Stephen P. Molnar wro
On 09/01/2018 08:26 AM, rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:
On Saturday, September 01, 2018 07:05:55 AM Stephen P. Molnar wrote:
On 08/31/2018 10:41 PM, David Christensen wrote:
On 08/31/2018 12:50 PM, Stephen P. Molnar wrote:
I am running Debian Stretch on my Linux platform.
I have noticed low inte
On Saturday, September 01, 2018 07:05:55 AM Stephen P. Molnar wrote:
> On 08/31/2018 10:41 PM, David Christensen wrote:
> > On 08/31/2018 12:50 PM, Stephen P. Molnar wrote:
> >> I am running Debian Stretch on my Linux platform.
> >>
> >> I have noticed low internet traffic when I have not been doi
On 08/31/2018 10:41 PM, David Christensen wrote:
On 08/31/2018 12:50 PM, Stephen P. Molnar wrote:
I am running Debian Stretch on my Linux platform.
I have noticed low internet traffic when I have not been doing
anything outside of my LAN. This has made me a tad suspicious.
Now:
root@AbN
On 2018-08-31 20:50, Stephen P. Molnar wrote:
I am running Debian Stretch on my Linux platform.
I have noticed low internet traffic when I have not been doing
anything outside of my LAN. This has made me a tad suspicious.
Now:
root@AbNormal:/home/comp# ifconfig
enp2s0: flags=4163 mtu 1500
On 08/31/2018 12:50 PM, Stephen P. Molnar wrote:
I am running Debian Stretch on my Linux platform.
I have noticed low internet traffic when I have not been doing anything
outside of my LAN. This has made me a tad suspicious.
Now:
root@AbNormal:/home/comp# ifconfig
enp2s0: flags=4163 mtu 15
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Stephen P. Molnar wrote:
> I am running Debian Stretch on my Linux platform.
>
> I have noticed low internet traffic when I have not been doing
> anything outside of my LAN. This has made me a tad suspicious.
>
>
> It turns out that this ISP, 162.23
I am running Debian Stretch on my Linux platform.
I have noticed low internet traffic when I have not been doing anything
outside of my LAN. This has made me a tad suspicious.
Now:
root@AbNormal:/home/comp# ifconfig
enp2s0: flags=4163 mtu 1500
inet 162.237.98.238 netmask 255.255.25
Hi.
For the archives:
Le 15883ième jour après Epoch,
François TOURDE écrivait:
> Hi list.
>
> I'm using Xen (long time ago), and I've a strange problem with one of
> the DomU. It's the only DomU with this behaviour. It doesn't reply to
> ping and can't have access to the net.
>
> In detail:
[..
Hi list.
I'm using Xen (long time ago), and I've a strange problem with one of
the DomU. It's the only DomU with this behaviour. It doesn't reply to
ping and can't have access to the net.
In detail:
Dom0 Debian stable:
Linux srv04 2.6.32-5-xen-amd64 #1 SMP Fri May 10 11:48:05 UTC 2013 x86_64
On Mon, 06 Aug 2012, Paul Zimmerman wrote:
> I prefer the alternative. tcpdump is a much smaller package. :)
>
> So, I did this for several minutes and looked at the log. Doesn't
> look like it needs much technical expertise to interpret. The
> content of the packets is printed in plain text and
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh writes:
>Alternatively you may use 'tcpdump' instead of wireshark.
>Run "tcpdump -s 1600 -i any -w /tmp/output.tcpdump.bin
>host 239.255.255.250", and stop it with ^C after 5-10s.
>It will save the packet dump to /tmp/output.tcpdump.bin,
>which you should gzip or xz
On Sun, 05 Aug 2012 14:04:59 -0400, John L. Cunningham wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 05, 2012 at 03:20:01PM +, Camaleón wrote:
>> On Sun, 05 Aug 2012 11:51:53 -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
>> > On Sun, 05 Aug 2012, Camaleón wrote:
>> >> First, a server is usually managed by people that know
On Sun, Aug 05, 2012 at 03:20:01PM +, Camaleón wrote:
> On Sun, 05 Aug 2012 11:51:53 -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > On Sun, 05 Aug 2012, Camaleón wrote:
> >> First, a server is usually managed by people that knows how this stuff
> >
> > This is not true anymore.
>
> Sure it is.
On Sun, 05 Aug 2012 11:51:53 -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Sun, 05 Aug 2012, Camaleón wrote:
>> > We've cleaned up a few work. We are not sure how the payload got in
>> > (best guess: browser). I am not allowed to disclose any more data
>> > than this.
>>
>> What?! Are you say
On Sun, 05 Aug 2012, Camaleón wrote:
> On Sat, 04 Aug 2012 19:48:35 -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > On Sat, 04 Aug 2012, Camaleón wrote:
>
> >> I've never read about linux boxes being used as bots, can you please
> >> indicate any report/stats about that fact?
> >
> > We've cleaned
On Sat, 04 Aug 2012 19:48:35 -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Sat, 04 Aug 2012, Camaleón wrote:
>> I've never read about linux boxes being used as bots, can you please
>> indicate any report/stats about that fact?
>
> We've cleaned up a few work. We are not sure how the payload go
On Sat, 04 Aug 2012, Camaleón wrote:
> On Sat, 04 Aug 2012 17:40:53 -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > On Sat, 04 Aug 2012, Camaleón wrote:
> >> > I know the constant connection is a multicast address, but what is
> >> > this other stuff? It looks like something is broken/misconfigured o
On Sat, 04 Aug 2012 17:40:53 -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Sat, 04 Aug 2012, Camaleón wrote:
>> > I know the constant connection is a multicast address, but what is
>> > this other stuff? It looks like something is broken/misconfigured or
>> > an outright hack of the Debian reposi
On Sat, 04 Aug 2012, Paul Zimmerman wrote:
> JulHer writes:
>
> >239.255.255.250 maybe is SSDP
> >>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simple_Service_Discovery_Protocol >The other
> >stuff I don't know,
> That's a possibility, I guess. But it's not an intermittent
> or occasional thing. And it doesn
On Sat, 04 Aug 2012, Camaleón wrote:
> > I know the constant connection is a multicast address, but what is this
> > other stuff? It looks like something is broken/misconfigured or an
> > outright hack of the Debian repository has occurred and many Debian
> > systems are now part of a botnet.
>
>
On Fri, 03 Aug 2012 10:56:14 -0700, Paul Zimmerman wrote:
> Today I downloaded a large group of updates, including Open Office and
> some dns-related utilities. Once they were applied, some strange network
> activity started on my machine. It keeps sending and receiving about
> 10-14
JulHer writes:
>239.255.255.250 maybe is SSDP
>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simple_Service_Discovery_Protocol >The other
>stuff I don't know,
That's a possibility, I guess. But it's not an intermittent
or occasional thing. And it doesn't run for a bit and then
stop. This is a constant 10-
Good time of the day, Paul.
You wrote:
> My Debian box is staying offline until I find out what is going on.
You can simply allow only desired output traffic - rather than staying
off line - until You solve Your problem OR everafter.
Sthu.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lis
El vie, 03-08-2012 a las 10:56 -0700, Paul Zimmerman escribió:
> I installed iftop and it says there is a constant connection to
> 239.255.255.250 and various transient connections to sites like
> vc-in-f106-1e100.net -- which turns out to be owned by Google -- and
> other sites like something call
03.08.2012, 23:06, "Frank McCormick" :
> Sorry first reply went to his email address -
>
> On 03/08/12 01:56 PM, Paul Zimmerman wrote:
>
>> Today I downloaded a large group of updates, including Open Office and some
>> dns-related utilities. Once they were
Sorry first reply went to his email address -
On 03/08/12 01:56 PM, Paul Zimmerman wrote:
Today I downloaded a large group of updates, including Open Office and some
dns-related utilities. Once they were applied,
> some strange network activity started on my machine. It keeps sending
&g
Today I downloaded a large group of updates, including Open Office and some
dns-related utilities. Once they were applied, some strange network activity
started on my machine. It keeps sending and receiving about 10-14k per second
but I cannot find any programs that would be doing anything on
On 28/01/2008, hce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I bought a new ADSL2+ modem and connected to my debian PC. I used DHCP
> to get IP address, I can ping www.google.com or any domain name, but
> my browser could not see www.google.com or any web site. Any
> explanations of why I could ping w
To download a web page with lynx hit the (p) key and you'll be presented
with a menu of built-in choices.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Jan 29, 2008 12:26 PM, Celejar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 08:48:28 +1100
> hce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I bought a new ADSL2+ modem and connected to my debian PC. I used DHCP
> > to get IP address, I can ping www.google.com or any domain name, but
> >
On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 08:48:28 +1100
hce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I bought a new ADSL2+ modem and connected to my debian PC. I used DHCP
> to get IP address, I can ping www.google.com or any domain name, but
> my browser could not see www.google.com or any web site. Any
> explanations o
Hi,
I bought a new ADSL2+ modem and connected to my debian PC. I used DHCP
to get IP address, I can ping www.google.com or any domain name, but
my browser could not see www.google.com or any web site. Any
explanations of why I could ping www.google.com (which means the DNS
and route worked fine),
Curt Howland escreveu:
> I have no idea where this 169.254.185.184 is coming from. Until
> 2.6.17, the DHCP server address of 192.168.1.16 was all that ever
> showed up.
>From RFC 3330 (http://rfc.net/rfc3330.html):
169.254.0.0/16 - This is the "link local" block. It is allocated for
comm
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thursday 24 August 2006 06:11, Tom Allison was heard to say:
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was heard to say:
> >> You may have zeroconf installed (one of the desktop packages
> >> recommends it for no good reason). Purge it.
> I've seen a number of peop
Curt Howland wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wednesday 23 August 2006 10:27, Scott Reese
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was heard to say:
You may have zeroconf installed (one of the desktop packages
recommends it for no good reason). Purge it.
Sure enough, zeroconf was install
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wednesday 23 August 2006 10:27, Scott Reese
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was heard to say:
> You may have zeroconf installed (one of the desktop packages
> recommends it for no good reason). Purge it.
Sure enough, zeroconf was installed. It is now purged
Curt Howland wrote:
> I have no idea where this 169.254.185.184 is coming from. Until 2.6.17,
> the DHCP server address of 192.168.1.16 was all that ever showed up.
You may have zeroconf installed (one of the desktop packages recommends it
for no good reason). Purge it.
--
John Hasler
--
To U
Curt Howland wrote:
>
> I have no idea where this 169.254.185.184 is coming from. Until
> 2.6.17, the DHCP server address of 192.168.1.16 was all that ever
> showed up.
>
> The 192.168.1.1 gateway and WAP show up just fine in the arp cache,
> routing still seems to work just fine.
>
Greetings:
On (22/08/06 17:42), Curt Howland wrote:
> DHCPOFFER from 192.168.1.1
> DHCPREQUEST on ath0 to 255.255.255.255 port 67
> DHCPACK from 192.168.1.1
> bound to 192.168.1.16 -- renewal in 432000 seconds.
> ~ # ifconfig
> ath0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:11:F9:FD:26:AB
> inet addr:169.
On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 05:42:38PM -0400, Curt Howland wrote:
> I brought up my ath0 (madwifi driver 802.11G) a few hours ago, and
> just looked at the interface.
> ath0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:11:F9:FD:26:AB
> inet addr:169.254.185.184 Bcast:169.254.255.255
That looks
On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 05:42:38PM -0400, Curt Howland wrote:
>
> I have no idea where this 169.254.185.184 is coming from. Until
> 2.6.17, the DHCP server address of 192.168.1.16 was all that ever
> showed up.
>
> The 192.168.1.1 gateway and WAP show up just fine in the arp cache,
> routing s
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi. Running up to date Sid, kernel 2.6.17-2-686
I brought up my ath0 (madwifi driver 802.11G) a few hours ago, and
just looked at the interface. Here are the consecutive commands from
my console window:
- ---
# ifup ath0
Int
Currently i am using a EDGE connection with my mobile phone. Every thing was fine. But recently i got that some thing is wrong my downoad is very poor now, but browsing speed is ok. Any body know the reason ?
S. M. Ibrahim (Lavlu)
Home page: http://lavluda.tripod.com
Blog: http://lavluda.b
On Saturday 25 February 2006 07:56, Joost Kraaijeveld wrote:
> Hi,
>
> After installing Etch on my AMD64 machine I suddenly have an extra eth1
> without actually having an NIC. I cannot activate it in the "Network
> settings" applet but it is shown during boot and in the output of
> ifconfig (with
Hi,
After installing Etch on my AMD64 machine I suddenly have an extra eth1
without actually having an NIC. I cannot activate it in the "Network
settings" applet but it is shown during boot and in the output of
ifconfig (without ip address). Can anyone give me clue as to where this
eth1 is commin
You probably have the ECN bit set in your networking.
I ran into a similar problem when I switched to 2.4 kernel.
See http://urchin.earth.li/ecn/ for more information.
Randy
On Mon, 2001-10-08 at 04:22, Jean-Paul Smets wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have a debian/woody + some sid packages which includes
Thank you so much for your help.
I could finnd one article on this issue in DP
http://www.debianplanet.org/debianplanet/article.php?sid=374
Now I understand what is this issue.
JPS.
--
Jean-Paul Smets-Solanes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GPG Fingerprint: 40FF FA78 75AA 680D 8BB4 EEF9 539A 79
On Monday 08 October 2001 07:22 am, Jean-Paul Smets wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have a debian/woody + some sid packages which includes a very strange
> issue. Whenever I connect to certain site with opera, netscape, konqueror,
> lynx or links, I never get an ackgowledge packet. Therefore, the http
> connect
Hi,
I have a debian/woody + some sid packages which includes a very strange issue.
Whenever I connect to certain site with opera, netscape, konqueror, lynx or
links, I never get an ackgowledge packet. Therefore, the http connection
always fail with a "no answer" kind of message. The sites which
On Mon, 24 Sep 2001 21:12:16 BST, Matthew Sackman writes:
>Ah ha!
>Things are not as bad as they seem.
>
>If I do cat /dev/zero | nc -u -p 1666 doris.namkas 1666
>and set up doris.namkas to receive correctly then knetload reports
>around 98000KBit/s which doesn't seem too bad.
>
>Doing it the
Ah ha!
Things are not as bad as they seem.
If I do cat /dev/zero | nc -u -p 1666 doris.namkas 1666
and set up doris.namkas to receive correctly then knetload reports
around 98000KBit/s which doesn't seem too bad.
Doing it the other way round reports the same (ish, though in this
case, the sendi
Ok people, do not use the drivers from scyld - ONLY use the modified
ones in the 2.4 kernels.
I say this because having compiled and installed the ones from
scyld I've had many lockups and the network just seems to die - you
can still ping your own network card, but nothing else is available.
Low
On Sun, 23 Sep 2001 22:12:43 BST, Matthew Sackman writes:
>Well, that's all gone through and worked - not quite as simple as I
>thought, but I got there. Network performance seems a little faster
>than before but still a little slow compared with what I thought
>would have been possible with a 10
support 100/full all that well (in general not just under linux) and they
> actually perform better when set to 100/half.
>
> Charles
>
>
>
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Matthew Sackman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Noah Meyerhans&q
perform better when set to 100/half.
Charles
- Original Message -
From: "Matthew Sackman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Noah Meyerhans" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Debian User List"
Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2001 2:12 PM
Subject: Re: Strange network performance
Well,
Well, that's all gone through and worked - not quite as simple as I
thought, but I got there. Network performance seems a little faster
than before but still a little slow compared with what I thought
would have been possible with a 100TX crossover network. Must be
a limitation of the cheap cards.
Yes, it's a 2.4.9 kernel on both machines with the included natsemi
driver.
dmesg reports much the same for both machines:
eth0: link is back. Enabling watchdog.
eth0: Setting full-duplex based on negotiated link capability.
eth0: Link changed: Autonegotiation advertising 05e1 partner .
eth0
On Sun, Sep 23, 2001 at 06:36:05PM +0100, Matthew Sackman wrote:
> I've just set up a 100TX network with 2 computer both running debian.
> Netgear FA311 cards and a single cross-over cable.
What version of the kernel are you running? If it's 2.4, are you
running the natsemi driver included with t
Hay Guys,
I've just set up a 100TX network with 2 computer both running debian.
Netgear FA311 cards and a single cross-over cable.
Generally it runs well, but occasionally I get weird freezed - using
dselect via an ssh session suffers from freezing of the session for
a minute or two every now and
Hi gang,
I've been having this weird problem with my system, and having wracked
my brains for a while, I still haven't come up with any good
explanations.
My machine at home is connected to the Internet through an ethernet
connection to the college network. I'm running pretty vanilla potato
with
On Tue, Jun 20, 2000 at 03:19:08PM -0400, Brad wrote:
> There was a problem a while back with netbase in potato/woody creating a
> /etc/network/interfaces file with the localhost line commented out (i
> don't know if that has been fixed yet), you may want to look into that.
I just updated my netba
On Mon, Jun 19, 2000 at 11:20:20PM -0400, Carl Fink wrote:
>
> After rebooting, I found unfixable errors on a FAT partition, but no
> problems with the e2fs ones. However, now certain functions don't
> work correctly. Notably:
>
> -innxmit can't connect to innd, although innd is running
>
I rebooted my system after noticing that the power supply fan wasn't
turning. (I have a big fan pointed at the open system right now.)
After rebooting, I found unfixable errors on a FAT partition, but no
problems with the e2fs ones. However, now certain functions don't
work correctly. Notably
The only other thing I can think of checking is your radio's firmware. Not
having access to a Ricochet network right now I can't do any testing.
On Tue, 2 Nov 1999, Dylan Thurston wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 02, 1999 at 07:29:44PM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > H. Maybe whatever it was got fix
On Tue, Nov 02, 1999 at 07:29:44PM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> H. Maybe whatever it was got fixed in the more recent kernels, if it
> was actually a kernel problem. I was running stock Debian 2.1 (I don't
> think I have my disc any longer) with a kernel built from kernel.org
> Were you ru
On Tue, 2 Nov 1999, Dylan Thurston wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 02, 1999 at 04:18:31PM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > Hm!
> > I reported almost the exact same problem right about the time when kernel
> > 2.2.0 came out. At that time I was running 2.0.36+kerneli and had updated
> > to 2.2.0
On Tue, Nov 02, 1999 at 04:18:31PM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Hm!
> I reported almost the exact same problem right about the time when kernel
> 2.2.0 came out. At that time I was running 2.0.36+kerneli and had updated
> to 2.2.0, and didn't know a thing until our cable modem went out
Hm!
I reported almost the exact same problem right about the time when kernel
2.2.0 came out. At that time I was running 2.0.36+kerneli and had updated
to 2.2.0, and didn't know a thing until our cable modem went out and I
needed to use the Ricochet. I'm almost certain it's a kernel issue,
bec
As of yesterday, I've been having some strange problems connecting
through my Ricochet modem. I'm able to connect and ping places just
fine; however, all useful connections (e.g., telnet, ftp, or http)
fail: with telnet, for instance, I get the standard connect messages
Trying 128.32.183.1...
Con
Yesterday I rebooted my machine, and now I am unable to initiate any network
connections. I can ping the box from the outside, and get web pages served
by apache, but I can't do anything from that box. (ssh doesn't work,
presumably because it tries to do a name lookup on the remote ip). dhcp
Martin,
I thought it was DNS at first also, then I was covinced it was routing, now I am
pretty sure that it is DHCP on the Winblows
machine. In NT you cannot change to a smaller subnet that 255.255.255.0 ( for
DHCP), and mine is .224. I decided to start using static and now everything is
fine.
Greg Green <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> machine since it is not acting as the router. Also, when I add a
> certain host to my Debian /etc/hosts file.the access is great. The
> I can also flood the machines on the network with ping -f and not lose
> any packets
> pop server = qpopper (2.2)
Hello,
I am experiencing a strange network problem and I do not know if my
Debian 1.3.1 kernel 2.0.32 machine is the problem, or an NT Server being
the cause. I have an NT Server acting as a router with my Debian
machine serving my web page and mail server. Here's the problem, when I
hi
Problem: I try to telnet to my system, and after typing the first two or three
characters of my username, my connection hangs. The system on the
other end is apparently ok.
System: "Hooked In" through an ISP called "WantWeb", the system is connected
to a Hybrid modem act
Brian Freeze typed:
> If I telnet out or ftp out I wait long periods of time for the username to
> be excepted then the passwd. From there it is the same for "ls" or any other
> command. For example. System www2.deltastar.nb.ca is the system with the new
> debian release on it and www.deltastar.nb.
Greetings to the list.
I have installed the latest version of debian on a pentium 166 system 64 meg
of ram. I installed to a second hard disk on the unit with win95 on the 1st
disk. I have no problems with the win95 boot and usage.
I have an etherlink 3Com PCI card installed.
This is the problem
83 matches
Mail list logo
