Hi,
On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 4:07 AM, dormitionsk...@hotmail.com <
dormitionsk...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Indeed, I don't know much about networking. I wish I could find a decent
> book about it. I looked on Amazon.com once, and didn't find anything I
> thought would be worthwhile. I need to look
On 2013-07-03 01:59, James Carlson wrote:
On 7/2/2013 6:11 PM, Jim Klimov wrote:
properly you'd need to update the /etc/netmasks file with this
entry:
69.146.183.56 255.255.255.248
/etc/netmasks is so 1980s. I suggest "/24" (CIDR notation) instead.
It's simpler to use and doesn't have the
On Jul 2, 2013, at 7:06 PM, Christopher Chan wrote:
> On Wednesday, July 03, 2013 07:45 AM, dormitionsk...@hotmail.com wrote:
>> I have to call it a day. I appreciate all the help, everyone! I appreciate
>> it very much! Thank you. Peter,
>
> You are almost there Peter. There are now two things
On Wednesday, July 03, 2013 08:56 AM, Christopher Chan wrote:
On Tuesday, July 02, 2013 09:53 AM, dormitionsk...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Jul 1, 2013, at 6:21 PM, Christopher Chan wrote:
Wait, what do you mean by "the gateway ip is the same as your nic
address"?
What I meant is that the Gateway
On Wednesday, July 03, 2013 07:45 AM, dormitionsk...@hotmail.com wrote:
I have to call it a day. I appreciate all the help, everyone! I
appreciate it very much! Thank you. Peter,
You are almost there Peter. There are now two things you can choose
from. 1) Use a dns caching resolver (like Googl
On Tuesday, July 02, 2013 09:53 AM, dormitionsk...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Jul 1, 2013, at 6:21 PM, Christopher Chan wrote:
Wait, what do you mean by "the gateway ip is the same as your nic address"?
What I meant is that the Gateway on line three says 192.168.0.4, and that is
also the IP addre
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 7/2/2013 7:45 PM, dormitionsk...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> On Jul 2, 2013, at 4:52 PM, Udo Grabowski (IMK) wrote:
>>> I put the following in my /etc/resolv.conf file: nameserver
>>> 69.144.49.30 nameserver 69.146.17.2
>>
>> Of course, if 192.168.0.15
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 7/2/2013 6:21 PM, Jim Klimov wrote:
> On 2013-07-02 23:56, dormitionsk...@hotmail.com wrote:
>> Is there a separate DHCP service?
>>
>> svcs -a | grep dhcp
>>
>> did not turn up anything.
Indeed; that's not how it works.
>
> Try to "ps -ef | gr
On 7/2/2013 6:11 PM, Jim Klimov wrote:
> It seems that the ISP did provide an 8-address block of routable
> IP addresses, so the default /24 netmask assigned to the interface
> is not correct (though it is not quite a problem unless you need
> to contact hosts on other ranges of the subnet). To fix
On Jul 2, 2013, at 4:52 PM, Udo Grabowski (IMK) wrote:
>> I put the following in my /etc/resolv.conf file:
>> nameserver 69.144.49.30
>> nameserver 69.146.17.2
>
> Of course, if 192.168.0.151 is a stealth local DNS
> slave server (I used such a beast for many years),
> this can work... I can't fi
On 03/07/2013 00:11, Jim Klimov wrote:
On 2013-07-02 23:41, Udo Grabowski (IMK) wrote:
On 02/07/2013 23:56, dormitionsk...@hotmail.com wrote:
> myad...@tryphon.ds:~# cat /etc/resolv.conf
> domain ds
> search ds
> nameserver 192.168.0.151
This looks like its correct.
... if the giv
On 2013-07-02 23:56, dormitionsk...@hotmail.com wrote:
Is there a separate DHCP service?
svcs -a | grep dhcp
did not turn up anything.
Try to "ps -ef | grep dhcp" for dhcpagent and such. It may be spawned
directly by ifconfig, if if detects being called for a DHCP-enabled
interface. To revis
On 2013-07-02 23:41, Udo Grabowski (IMK) wrote:
I created an /etc/hostname.bnx0 file with the following:
69.146.183.59
This should contain your hostname, not the IP !
Be sure to put this 'IP hostname' in /etc/hosts !
This is a good idea, but mostly for manageability (one place to change
th
On 02/07/2013 23:56, dormitionsk...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Jul 2, 2013, at 3:41 PM, Udo Grabowski (IMK) wrote:
On 02/07/2013 23:18, dormitionsk...@hotmail.com wrote:
svcadm disable svc:/network/physical:nwam
svcadm enable svc:/network/physical:default
That's always a good thing.
I created
On Jul 2, 2013, at 3:41 PM, Udo Grabowski (IMK) wrote:
> On 02/07/2013 23:18, dormitionsk...@hotmail.com wrote:
>> svcadm disable svc:/network/physical:nwam
>> svcadm enable svc:/network/physical:default
>
> That's always a good thing.
>
>>
>> I created an /etc/hostname.bnx0 file with the foll
On 02/07/2013 23:18, dormitionsk...@hotmail.com wrote:
svcadm disable svc:/network/physical:nwam
svcadm enable svc:/network/physical:default
That's always a good thing.
I created an /etc/hostname.bnx0 file with the following:
69.146.183.59
This should contain your hostname, not the IP !
Well, I don't know what just happened, but the /etc/defaultrouter disappeared.
So, I put it back, and rebooted. Now this mostly-stock OI box works. I.e. --
DNS works, and I can ssh into it from outside the network.
I'm hesitant to declare this solved just yet -- until I try this on the (more
On Jul 2, 2013, at 2:51 PM, Timothy Coalson wrote:
> When I set up a static IP and manual DNS server, I just used the GUI, it is
> under the "locations" button on the network preferences dialog that appears
> when you click the network icon in the notification area (or go to
> system->administrati
When I set up a static IP and manual DNS server, I just used the GUI, it is
under the "locations" button on the network preferences dialog that appears
when you click the network icon in the notification area (or go to
system->administration->network). Since you used the GUI to set up the IP
anywa
On 07/02/13 16:16, dormitionsk...@hotmail.com wrote:
> As you can see, the entries for /etc/resolv.conf are no longer there. (This
> also happened to me before, when I was fighting with this on the other
> machine this past Saturday. I think it has to do with the network manager
> software.)
Indeed, this does look like a DNS problem. I just put the IP Address of our
monastery's website in Firefox in the OI box, and it brought up the site.
So maybe it isn't as bad of a network problem as it looked like yesterday. Or
at least it is better now.
But I still really need help getti
First off, I'd like to thank you all for all the help you've given me. I
really appreciate it. I'd appreciate it if you'd bear with me just a little
bit longer...
I called our ISP, and the tech support person told me that the person who told
me last week that she had reconfigured the modem to
I've read many pages on publishing your own repo, and am stumped on just one
thing: How do you secure publish access to a local repo running as a service
?
I had created a number of packages using my own script and publishing just
to the local file system. I am now trying out the pkgbuild scri
Hello Peter,
I see that this has already been a long thread, and you've tried to
reconfigure and to explain some things in various posts. Can you
outline the logical configuration of what you're trying to build
and what you have as of now? Namely, it is indeed suspicious that
plugging in your OI
Hello Peter,
On 2013-07-01 23:49, dormitionsk...@hotmail.com wrote:
The /etc/nsswitch.conf is the stock OI configuration. I have not changed
anything in it.
Actually, this may be the culprit for "not seeing hosts in the
internet": the default nsswitch may include only a configuration
for nam
On Tue, Jul 02, 2013 at 07:05:48AM -0400, James Carlson wrote:
> On 07/01/13 20:21, Christopher Chan wrote:
> > Wait, what do you mean by "the gateway ip is the same as your nic address"?
>
> He's mistakenly reading the interface route as though it were a
> "gateway" entry.
Here's an example from
On 07/01/13 19:23, dormitionsk...@hotmail.com wrote:
> Unless someone can clue me into something that might get things working
> again, my plan for tomorrow is to take a fresh OI server there that only has
> 192.168.0.something, and try it, to see if it can get to the internet. If it
> can, I'm
On 07/01/13 17:49, dormitionsk...@hotmail.com wrote:
> I thought it was wrong because the gateway was the same as my nic address.
On an interface route, the next hop address is the interface itself. I
think you're staring at the wrong issue.
Drop back to basics. What works? Have you tried usin
On 07/01/13 17:33, dormitionsk...@hotmail.com wrote:
>> Is 192.168.0.1 your NAT box (your "router")?
>>
>
> 192.168.0.1 is the cisco router.
>
> 192.168.0.4 is the physical nic of the machine. (theotokos.dsicons.net)
>
> 192.168.0.3 is the "routert3" zone.
OK. That's a start. But that seems
On 07/01/13 20:21, Christopher Chan wrote:
> Wait, what do you mean by "the gateway ip is the same as your nic address"?
He's mistakenly reading the interface route as though it were a
"gateway" entry.
--
James Carlson 42.703N 71.076W
___
30 matches
Mail list logo
