> Matthew Emmerton wrote:
> >
> > > Where can I get list of officially assigned PnP Vendor IDs?
> > > I have a noname PnP ISA NIC that does not work.
> >
> > There is no "official" list (at least for free access), but the
"unofficial"
>
> Where can I get list of officially assigned PnP Vendor IDs?
> I have a noname PnP ISA NIC that does not work.
There is no "official" list (at least for free access), but the "unofficial"
list is here: http://www.yourvote.com/pci/
--
Matt Emmerton
___
Or, switch to using IPFILTER/IPNAT which has special features to handle the
case of FTP.
MAtt
> Your problem is that the ports you have allowed are not the only ports FTP
> uses. FTP makes use of two separate TCP connections.
>
> The first is the command connection ( 21/tcp) which is the connect
> I got an error while adding a zone in my named configuration, the zone is
properly setted and added in named.conf. Here is the error I got in
/var/log/message:
>
> Jun 4 05:49:36 webhosting named[37915]: master zone "lamedomain.com" (IN)
rejected due to errors (serial 2003040614)
> Jun 4 05:49:
- Original Message -
From: "Dan Langille" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2003 8:12 AM
Subject: How do I specify a unit for ppp?
> >From man ppp I see this:
>
> The -unit flag tells ppp to only attempt to open /dev/tunN.
>
> I want it to use tun0.
> Hello FreeBSD gurus,
>
> I was surprised; there are no SAPDB (www.sapdb.org) in
> http://www.freebsd.org/ports/databases.html list!
> Has someone tried to install SAPDB on FreeBSD? Is it possible to create
new
> port?
I tried about a year or so ago, but gave up. The SAPDB "build tools" are
extr
In your /etc/rc.conf, are you setting an IP address for the dc0 interface?
If you are, then PPPoE won't work properly since the interface is already up
and running.
Check for a line that looks like this:
ifconfig_dc0="inet 10.0.0.1 netmask 0xfffc"
If a line like this exists, comment it out
t; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Matthew Emmerton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2002 10:11 PM
Subject: Re: Problems with PPP and one annoying ISP
> Hi,
>
> Does it make a difference if you
>
> set ifaddr x.x.x.x y.y.y.y
>
I've got this ISP who won't provide support for UNIX that I have to get
working on UNIX.
I can dial up to the ISP perfectly fine using Windows 95, but whenever I try
and configure my FreeBSD machine to dial up, ppp never works right.
Here's the chunk of my ppp.conf:
[dumbisp]
set authname
> i was having problems with a SMC9432TX ethernet card.i
> already have a Realtek 1211TX configured on this
> machine.its just not recognizing this card.i am not
> getting a tx0 assigned.
> here's the dmesg below.hope somebody can give me
> useful pointer's.
> Thanks in advance,
> Vinod
>
> The R
On Wed, 17 Apr 2002, Mark Filipak wrote:
> Hello All!
>
> This is an introduction and a ping.
>
> I live in Mansfield, Ohio, USA, and have some very specific problems and questions.
>The first should probably be whether this is the right list for me so
>
> I just installed GallantWEB
> "Matthew Emmerton" wrote:
>
> | From: "Greg Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> | To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> | Sent: Friday, February 22, 2002 10:39 PM
> | Subject: ppp -nat fails with adsl, but ok with modem
> |
> | > I've had ppp -nat
What version of FreeBSD are you using? The ppp included in early 4.x
distributions doesn't have the TCP MSS fixup code that is required to make
things work properly with a PPPoE connection, and cause the kinds of
symptoms that you describe.
Matt
- Original Message -
From: "Greg Black" <
> i've spent a good number of hours RTFMs, trying to make the best of a bad
> situtaion: userland natd instead of kernel-space nat.
I've been told that if you use ipf and ipnat, then you get the benefit of
kernel-space NAT. Have you investigated this to see how it compares to
natd/ipfw for you
> Am 27.01.2002 um 09:59:14 schrieb Matthew Emmerton:
>
> Hi Matthew,
>
> > Why not just add an IP alias for the "new" network on each machine?
Each
> > system will respond to packets directed to either network, but without
the
> > complexity of a
> (order of quoted mail slightly altered)
>
> >I'm looking at making natd into a kernel option ("options IPNAT") and
using
> >a combination of sysctls and a front-end program to manage how nat
operates,
> >much like "options IPFIREWALL" and ipfw works today.
I've been told that 'options IPFILTER'
> Am 27.01.2002 um 00:41:23 schrieb Rogier R. Mulhuijzen:
>
> Hi Roger,
>
> > What sort of changes are you talking about here? Maybe there's a
different
> > way of going about it.
>
> I want to move an existing network from 91.0.0.0/8 to 172.16.0.0/16.
> Furthermore name resolution changes from w
> Am 27.01.2002 um 02:11:30 schrieb Matthew Emmerton:
>
> Hi Matt,
>
> > Here's the patch that I wrote some time ago.
>
> thanks a lot!
> Did you send-pr the patch? It seems quite necessary to be added.
Not yet. One of the things that I don't like about th
> On Sat, 26 Jan 2002, Clemens Hermann wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Is there a way to get natd to reload the config-file without
> > terminating?
>
> There is a natd patch, running around here somewhere, that allows
> you to send a HUP signal to natd and have it reload the config.
>
> You will hav
> > Matthew Emmerton wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > In the continuing saga of IPSec over PPPoE for a retail POS
environment that
> > > I'm maintaing, the problems seem to become more complex as time goes
on.
> > >
> >
On Wed, 28 Nov 2001, Tariq Rashid wrote:
>
> apologies - natd was running on the interfaces which causes the effects.
>
> well - i didn't know that natd didn't respond to ip address changes...
It will, if you run it with the '-dynamic' flag.
--
Matt Emmerton
To Unsubscribe: send mail to
On Tue, 27 Nov 2001, Andre Oppermann wrote:
> Matthew Emmerton wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > In the continuing saga of IPSec over PPPoE for a retail POS environment that
> > I'm maintaing, the problems seem to become more complex as time goes on
> On Mon, 26 Nov 2001, Matthew Emmerton wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > In the continuing saga of IPSec over PPPoE for a retail POS environment
that
> > I'm maintaing, the problems seem to become more complex as time goes on.
> >
> > The network is quit
Hi all,
In the continuing saga of IPSec over PPPoE for a retail POS environment that
I'm maintaing, the problems seem to become more complex as time goes on.
The network is quite simple:
[ LAN #1 ] - [ FreeBSD Gateway #1 ] - [ ISP ] - [ FreeBSD Gateway #2 ] - [
LAN #2 ]
Both LANs connect using
Thanks for all who replied to this thread, indicating that a bad cable was
likely the culprit.
In this case, changing the cable didn't help, but commenting out the
"ifconfig_rl0='up'" line in /etc/rc.conf fixed the problem.
Any ideas on why doing an 'ifconfig rl0 up' before starting PPP (using s
> Greg Black wrote:
> Now, the final question: I have to implement something similar
> on a 4.1-R system several thousand km away. There's no question
> of upgrading it from 4.1 and I can't afford to have it panic.
> Is it reasonable to expect that PPPoE will work OK provided I
> add the netgrap
NETGRAPH can't talk PPPoE to the DSL modem (bad NIC) or c) DSL modem isn't
passing along our data to the ISP (bad ISP.)
--
Matthew Emmerton || [EMAIL PROTECTED]
GSI Computer Services || http://www.gsicomp.on.ca
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
Dynamic loading of negraph modules is still broken, and probably won't be
fixed until 5.0 (at least that's what the comments on the zillion PRs
about this problem say.)
Add 'options NETGRAPH_ETHER' and 'options NEGRAPH_SOCKET' to your kernel
config file and reb
> On Mon, Oct 15, 2001 at 07:28:49PM -0400, Matthew Emmerton wrote:
> > I've got two networks -- A (10.0.0.0/24) and B (192.168.0.0/24), both
> > behind NAT gateways.
> >
> > The problem I'm having is that I cannot connect to the mail server on
> > n
I've got two networks -- A (10.0.0.0/24) and B (192.168.0.0/24), both
behind NAT gateways.
The problem I'm having is that I cannot connect to the mail server on
network A (10.0.0.2) from any machine behind the NAT gateway on network B.
However, any system on network B can successfully ping the g
Folks,
I'm supporting a retail store setup where stores connect to the head office
using IPSec over PPPoE links, handled by a FreeBSD 4.3 server. Both IPSec
and PPPoE are working fine. However, lately we've been having problems
where PPP will disconnect for some reason and reconnect. Since I'm
On Mon, 10 Sep 2001, Brian Somers wrote:
> > On Mon, 10 Sep 2001, Brian Somers wrote:
> >
> > > > > On Mon, 10 Sep 2001 11:54:49 +0100,
> > > > > Brian Somers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > > >
> > > > > The local endpoint can't be pinged unless you've got a route for
> > > > > it... t
On Mon, 10 Sep 2001, Brian Somers wrote:
> > > On Mon, 10 Sep 2001 11:54:49 +0100,
> > > Brian Somers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> >
> > > The local endpoint can't be pinged unless you've got a route for
> > > it... that's just the way the routing code works.
> >
> > > You can ping th
I've got a question for all of you net hackers.
When I configure a gif interface, why can't I ping the local endpoint on the
inside of the tunnel? I've just been through hell and back trying to get
some IPSec tunnels created (they're working now, thanks to all those who
helped me out), and this
> >> The machine has 2 interfaces (obviously ep0 and ep1), and
> >> after about 24 hours uptime, ep1 was somehow broken:
> >>
> >> If trying to ping: sendto: no bufferspace available
> >>
> >> ifconfig ep1 down, ifconfig ep1 up was a work-around, but no
> >> solution...
> >>
> >> Netstat showed no
Hi all,
I've been trying to get an IPSec tunneling VPN between two boxes working
without much success. I've read the FAQs and HOWTOs on www.freebsd.org,
www.freebsddiary.org, www.daemonnews.org and www.kame.net and they all have
helped me get closer to where I want to be, but I'm still missing s
However, in 3.4, netgraph + pppoe didn't require "ifconfig iface up" in
rc.conf in order to use PPPoE, but that requirement has been in 4.x from the
beginning. The big question is, why did this behaviour change? (Insert POLA
argument here.)
I can't really see why we shoudl be forcing users to "i
I'm not sure if it's just fxp0 -- a few weeks ago a few people reported this
very same problem with PPPoE for cards other than fxp0.
Adding an ifconfig_xxx="up" to /etc/rc.conf (as suggested by an article on
daemonnews or freebsddiary) "fixed" the problems for the people that I heard
about -- but
> Does anyone see any problem with the below rc.conf network info? Because
the
> aliases arent working.. and I have verified that the 209.190.xxx.xxx ips
are
> being routed to the 209.51.xxx.xxx IP, anyone have any idea on this?
>
> network_interfaces="fxp0 lo0"
> ifconfig_fxp0="inet 209.51.xxx.x
> i don't see a security issue in this, just want to ask if this is ok (or
> maybe unwanted?):
>
> in src/usr.sbin/arp/arp.c in function search() (starts line ~429) i see
> this (line ~447):
>
> if ((buf = malloc(needed)) == NULL)
>
> this allocated memory isn't free'd later in this func
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > about my SOHO router project, I came accross a tough problem, may
> > > be I overlook that there is a solution already? The VPN gateway
> > > at the small office / home office (SOHO) has an IPsec tunnel
> > > connecting it to its headquarter:
> > >
> > > setkey -c < > > sp
> Hi,
>
> about my SOHO router project, I came accross a tough problem, may
> be I overlook that there is a solution already? The VPN gateway
> at the small office / home office (SOHO) has an IPsec tunnel
> connecting it to its headquarter:
>
> setkey -c < spdadd ${sohonet} ${homenet} -P out ip
> It's taking so long because it's trying to do a DNS resolution of every IP
> address that it prints. My guess is that @Home uses some non-registered
> RFC1918 address space for its clients, so those addresses will never
> resolve, and will take forever not doing so. The -n flag disables DNS
> re
> >Are you sure the card is using the 8139 chipset? The 8139 can provide
PHY
> >information via the status register. Since we're obviously not getting
any
> >such data, I'm wondering if this card is based on something else.
>
> I'm pretty sure it is. The Linux driver source file is called
"rtl8
> >[snip] Sorry 'bout that. I was working on the assumption that the driver
> >was working properly, and was just dying during userland init (ifconfig).
> >The "rlphy0: no media present" line tells us that the driver isn't 100%
> >healthy, at least with this card.
>
> Not a problem. Good learnin
> Okay, I've managed to get the debug kernel built and save the core file.
> I'll include the output of some basic debugging below. If there's
anything
> else that would be helpful, let me know. The D-Link driver disk includes
C
> source for a Linux driver, so when the problem gets narrowed down
> I'm setting up a system (200MHz) with 4.2-RELEASE, and the network card
that
> I have to go in it is a D-Link DFE-538TX/R PCI card, based on the RealTek
> 8139 chipset.
[ snip ]
> pci0: (vendor=0x1186, dev=0x1300) at 11.0 irq 11
>
> I know the unknown card here is the network card, since th
> I'm connected through cable to the 'Net, and the provider I go
> through, it appears, somehow has it setup that if I change nics, I hvae a
> bugger of a time re-acquiring a lease ...
I presume dhclient is what you use to get your IP address.
I've seen ISPs that record the MAC address of the in
> > > > > Everybody is saying use 255.255.255.255 for an alias. Noone is
giving
> > > > > reasons why.
> >
> >Exactly. I never got a good answer to this when I first stumbled upon
it,
> >and I still haven't. All I know is that this is the way it needs to be
done
> >in order for things to work pr
> Josef Karthauser wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 27, 2001 at 07:16:14AM +0100, Rogier R. Mulhuijzen wrote:
> > >
> > > >The point is that you need to use a netmask of 255.255.255.255 for
aliased
> > > >IPs on FreeBSD, regardless of the alias of the primary (non-alias)
IP.
> > >
> > > Everybody is say
> > On Tue, Feb 27, 2001 at 07:16:14AM +0100, Rogier R. Mulhuijzen wrote:
> > >
> > > > [ Matt Emmerton wrote: ]
> > > >The point is that you need to use a netmask of 255.255.255.255 for
aliased
> > > >IPs on FreeBSD, regardless of the alias of the primary (non-alias)
IP.
>
> no this is incorrect.
> > do 'netmask 255.255.255.255' instead or 'netmask 0x' since this
is
> > an alias... for some reason otherwise services may not bind to the ip
> > correctly
>
> Why would this be? The two are numerically equivalent.
Yes, but you're missing the point.
The point is that you need to use
> >is it possible to have natd run on both external interfaces without
> >causing problems? how would i configure that?
>
> Why would you want to run natd on external 2 interfaces at the same time?
I'm not sure if this is the case, but if the box was multihomed (for
example, DHCP-based DSL and C
> Does anyone know of a FAQ or HOWTO for adding IP aliases to a
> FreeBSD box? I can do it under linux and Im just wondering if there are
any
> differences or what-not.
In /etc/rc.conf, add or edit lines like this (I have an 'ed0' network card):
network_interfaces="lo0 ed0"
ifconfig_lo0=
> At 10:22 4-2-01 -0800, Julian Elischer wrote:
> >John Telford wrote:
> > >
> > > I'm putting a 4.2 R firewall in for a ppoe connection. (sympatico)
> > > Is there any workaround I can use so I don't have to reduce the MTU on
all
> > > the internal stations ?
> > > It's a mix of Windows 9x and M
th
At one point in time, "sandbox" meant a) as above.
However, with the advent of chroot and the security gains that it provides,
"sandbox" has been re-defined to mean b) in most cases.
Unfortunately, this means that some documentation causes confusion, such as
named-related s
> > Matthew Emmerton wrote:
> Julian Elischer wrote:
> > Now, I'm not trying to play devil's advocate (although that would make
me a
> > friend of Chucky, right?) but I'm wondering if user-ppp is the right
place
> > to make this change. Isn'
Isn't the problem specific to PPPoE? If that's the
case, then shouldn't it be ng_pppoe that gets updated, so that anything that
uses ng_pppoe will have the option of enabling the 'tcpmssfixup' option?
--
Matthew Emmerton
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
58 matches
Mail list logo
