On 03/30/10 23:22, Kostyantyn wrote:
Check the User Manual for Virtual Box:
http://download.virtualbox.org/virtualbox/3.1.6/UserManual.pdf
Take a look at section 6.3:"VirtualBox.
A virtual machine with NAT enabled acts much like a real computer that
connects
to the Internet through a router. The
On Tue, 2010-03-30 at 13:08 -0600, Joseph wrote:
> On 03/30/10 14:55, stosss wrote:
> >On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 2:08 PM, Joseph wrote:
> >> I'm running Windows XP on VirtualBox, it has a network "NAT" so the IP
> >> address it gets:
> >> IP: 10.0.2.15
> >> Gateway: 10.0.2.2
> >> DNS: 10.10.0.1 ?(Li
On Tue, 2010-03-30 at 13:08 -0600, Joseph wrote:
> On 03/30/10 14:55, stosss wrote:
> >On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 2:08 PM, Joseph wrote:
> >> I'm running Windows XP on VirtualBox, it has a network "NAT" so the IP
> >> address it gets:
> >> IP: 10.0.2.15
> >> Gateway: 10.0.2.2
> >> DNS: 10.10.0.1 ?(Li
On 03/30/10 14:55, stosss wrote:
On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 2:08 PM, Joseph wrote:
I'm running Windows XP on VirtualBox, it has a network "NAT" so the IP
address it gets:
IP: 10.0.2.15
Gateway: 10.0.2.2
DNS: 10.10.0.1 ?(Linux router)
I've tried to access the Windows IP by creating another subnet:
On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 2:08 PM, Joseph wrote:
> I'm running Windows XP on VirtualBox, it has a network "NAT" so the IP
> address it gets:
> IP: 10.0.2.15
> Gateway: 10.0.2.2
> DNS: 10.10.0.1 (Linux router)
>
> I've tried to access the Windows IP by creating another subnet:
> ifconfig eth0:1 10.0
I'm running Windows XP on VirtualBox, it has a network "NAT" so the IP address
it gets:
IP: 10.0.2.15
Gateway: 10.0.2.2
DNS: 10.10.0.1 (Linux router)
I've tried to access the Windows IP by creating another subnet:
ifconfig eth0:1 10.0.2.0 up
but it doesn't work, I can not ping the Windows IP:
I tried to respond to your NVidia forums post; but couldn't join the
forum (apparently they didn't like my gmail address).
- FWIW I get that wait (WAIT (E, 0, 0x0887d, 0) ) when I activate the
following kernel options:
# set "Bus options (PCI etc.)" -> "Support for DMA Remapping Devices"
to "
Hi Maxim,
as long as you will only be using it internally I think there is no
problem to use the FTP. I think that the probability of someone doing
that is very low. One should be interested in your stuff to spend time
doing that. The fact is, since you will be connected to the Internet
you must s
Thanks, Luiz. Yeah, just noticed when I did an emerge
of iptraf it said it was going for just one package
but then went and got the ipv6 diff file too.
No, the crossover LAN I'm working on will be strictly
private. My only connection to the Web is via dialup.
But can someone actually squeeze down
Matt and Alexander, you're right. Sorry for the wrong info guys.
After reading more about it I realized it's just an router issue!
Thanks
On 3/22/06, Matt Richards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Luiz Carlos Guidolin wrote:
> >
> >> ipv4. IPV6 requires a specific hardware to run.
> >
> > No, it do
> Luiz Carlos Guidolin wrote:
>
>> ipv4. IPV6 requires a specific hardware to run.
>
> No, it doesn't.
ipv6 is just a new protocol just different software the network and
computer hardware dont have to change! althought i can see why you might
say this because some broadband routers dont support ip
Luiz Carlos Guidolin wrote:
> ipv4. IPV6 requires a specific hardware to run.
No, it doesn't.
Alexander Skwar
--
If you think nobody cares if you're alive, try missing a couple of car
payments.
-- Earl Wilson
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
On Tue, 21 Mar 2006 19:37:23 -0600
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
> On Tuesday 21 March 2006 18:18, "Luiz Carlos Guidolin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote about 'Re: [gentoo-user] ping!':
> > IPV6 requires a specific hardware to run.
>
> Blatantly
On Tuesday 21 March 2006 18:18, "Luiz Carlos Guidolin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote about 'Re: [gentoo-user] ping!':
> IPV6 requires a specific hardware to run.
Blatantly and completely false. Any hardware that can transport ipv4
traffic can transport ipv6 traffi
Hi, ipv6 is a newer protocol that is meant to substitute the actual
ipv4. IPV6 requires a specific hardware to run. Since the actual
protocol is version 4 there is no need to include a specific flag for
it. And my suggestion is, use "-ipv6" since you probably doesn't have
the hardware for it.
The
--- Franta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-03-21 at 11:43 -0800, maxim wexler
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Oops, lost the thread "turning off dhcp" end.
> >
> > Thanks to Neil. Both boxen can ping each other.
> >
> > Now to clear up a few loose ends:
> >
> > Why on the fresh(2.6.15) in
On Tue, 21 Mar 2006 11:43:57 -0800 (PST), maxim wexler wrote:
> I note the abundance of choices in portage/net-ftp.
> What do I need? I'll just be moving files back and
> forth. I don't think security is an issue. Is ftp all
> I need?
FTP is more than you need. scp will do the job with only SSH r
On Tue, 2006-03-21 at 11:43 -0800, maxim wexler wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Oops, lost the thread "turning off dhcp" end.
>
> Thanks to Neil. Both boxen can ping each other.
>
> Now to clear up a few loose ends:
>
> Why on the fresh(2.6.15) install does net.eth0 start
> automatically and the older(2.6.12)
Hi,
Oops, lost the thread "turning off dhcp" end.
Thanks to Neil. Both boxen can ping each other.
Now to clear up a few loose ends:
Why on the fresh(2.6.15) install does net.eth0 start
automatically and the older(2.6.12) have to be started
manually? Is this a bug or a feature?
I note the abund
19 matches
Mail list logo
