On Mon 06 Jun 2016 at 15:27:16 (+0000), Mark Fletcher wrote: > On Mon, 6 Jun 2016 at 23:15, Santiago Vila <sanv...@unex.es> wrote: > > > On Mon, Jun 06, 2016 at 10:06:54AM +1200, Jan Bakuwel wrote: > > > Check your firewall rules. > > > > It can't be firewall rules. Try this to block outgoing ping: > > > > iptables -A OUTPUT -p icmp --icmp-type echo-request -j REJECT > > > > then try to ping anywhere. You will get a different error message, > > namely "Destination Port Unreachable". > > > > [ Why people do not read all messages in the thread before answering > > is a mystery to me ].
> No, that's not true, you definitely can get this very error due to > something to do with the firewall, maybe it's not able to resolve the ping > target rather than not able to reach the resulting host, I'm damned if I > can remember the specifics but I've definitely seen this happen on an lfs > box before and it was nothing to do with perms (as I said before, to your > point about people not reading the whole thread...) I don't understand this argument. Why would ping bother to open a socket to a host it couldn't resolve? I know precious little about firewall rules, but AIUI the rules determine whether to respond with things like Drop, Reject, Deny. Now the OP didn't manage to open a socket; that's in the error message: "ping: icmp open socket: Operation not permitted" So how would ping find out how the firewall was going to react to its ping message without opening a socket to send something? Cheers, David.
