Re: network mystery!!??

On 26/03/2022 14:24, Cameron Simpson wrote: So what you see below is normal. Don't sweat it. Here's an example from where I'm sitting to a host on a TPG network: Maybe he should be "sweating it".  He has a web server with a public IP address. [egreshko@meimei ~]$ host ws.linuxlighthouse.com w

Re: network mystery!!??

> Am 26.03.2022 um 08:55 schrieb Ed Greshko : > > ws.linuxlighthouse.com has address 108.220.213.121 > > Now try connecting to http://ws.linuxlighthouse.com/ Not surprisingly, the server is unavailable. After all, this is the OP's network mystery. Question is, can the OP log in to the server

Re: network mystery!!??

On 26/03/2022 16:33, Peter Boy wrote: Am 26.03.2022 um 08:55 schrieb Ed Greshko : ws.linuxlighthouse.com has address 108.220.213.121 Now try connecting to http://ws.linuxlighthouse.com/ Not surprisingly, the server is unavailable. After all, this is the OP's network mystery. Question is, c

yubikey?

I'm curious about getting a yubikey to use for 2fa, and wondering if it will just work on Fedora 35+. I've seen an article on setting up yubikey for auth on fedora, but I'm not interested in using it to authenticate for login on my laptop. I'm interested in having it work for 2fa on chrome and fi

Re: yubikey?

On Sat, 2022-03-26 at 08:42 -0400, Neal Becker wrote: > I'm curious about getting a yubikey to use for 2fa, and wondering if > it > will just work on Fedora 35+.  I've seen an article on setting up > yubikey > for auth on fedora, but I'm not interested in using it to > authenticate for > login on m

Re: network mystery!!??

On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 8:16 PM Samuel Sieb wrote: > On 3/25/22 19:29, Jack Craig wrote: > > i have a networking mystery ; i hope someone might give me a clue. > > > > sample route, ... > > > > 10.0.0.101 ws.linuxlighthouse.com > > (internal IP) 2 packets transmitt

Re: network mystery!!??

On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 8:25 PM Ed Greshko wrote: > On 26/03/2022 10:29, Jack Craig wrote: > > > > > > > > i have a networking mystery ; i hope someone might give me a clue. > > > > i am working to restore a web server to internet access that is failing > after att update > > the att older modem

Re: network mystery!!??

On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 11:25 PM Cameron Simpson wrote: > I normally don't top post, but there nothing I can meaningfully trim > from your excellent detailed description. So I'm leaving it below. > > To your traceroute, route tracing (IIRC) depends on setting a max hop > count on the outbound pac

Re: network mystery!!??

On Sat, Mar 26, 2022 at 12:56 AM Ed Greshko wrote: > On 26/03/2022 14:24, Cameron Simpson wrote: > > So what you see below is normal. Don't sweat it. Here's an example from > > where I'm sitting to a host on a TPG network: > > > > Maybe he should be "sweating it". He has a web server with a publ

Re: network mystery!!??

On Sat, Mar 26, 2022 at 1:34 AM Peter Boy wrote: > > > > Am 26.03.2022 um 08:55 schrieb Ed Greshko : > > > > ws.linuxlighthouse.com has address 108.220.213.121 > > > > Now try connecting to http://ws.linuxlighthouse.com/ > > Not surprisingly, the server is unavailable. After all, this is the OP's

Re: network mystery!!??

On Sat, Mar 26, 2022 at 1:57 AM Ed Greshko wrote: > On 26/03/2022 16:33, Peter Boy wrote: > > > >> Am 26.03.2022 um 08:55 schrieb Ed Greshko : > >> > >> ws.linuxlighthouse.com has address 108.220.213.121 > >> > >> Now try connecting to http://ws.linuxlighthouse.com/ > > Not surprisingly, the serv

Re: pipewire and wireplumber

> On 25 Mar 2022, at 18:58, R. G. Newbury wrote: > >  >> >> Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2022 01:02:01 -0700 > Samuel Sieb wrote >> Subject: Re: pipewire and wireplumber >> R. G. Newbury wrote: >>> DJ Delorie wrote Geoffrey Leach writes: > Is there a 'Getting Started With pipewire' and/or wir

Re: pipewire and wireplumber

On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 2:57 PM R. G. Newbury wrote: > It took a couple of years for each of pulseaudio and systemd to reach > adequate levels of instalability and reliability. Likely the same for > pipewire systemd can't even reboot a system which has been booted into rescue mode, so calling i

Setting netmask permanently

Device vendor insists on a netmask 255.255.0.0, so % ifconfig eno1 169.254.10.6 netmask 255.255.0.0 which changes netmask, but it soon reverts to the original value 255.255.255.255 ifdown/ifup does not change the situation Any ideas? ___ users mailing

Re: Setting netmask permanently

have you edited /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-eno1 On Sat, Mar 26, 2022 at 6:42 PM Geoffrey Leach wrote: > Device vendor insists on a netmask 255.255.0.0, so > % ifconfig eno1 169.254.10.6 netmask 255.255.0.0 > which changes netmask, but it soon reverts to the original > value 255.255.25

Re: network mystery!!??

> Date: Saturday, March 26, 2022 11:42:57 -0700 > From: Jack Craig > > On Sat, Mar 26, 2022 at 1:57 AM Ed Greshko > wrote: > >> On 26/03/2022 16:33, Peter Boy wrote: >> > >> >> Am 26.03.2022 um 08:55 schrieb Ed Greshko >> >> : >> >> >> >> ws.linuxlighthouse.com has address 108.220.213.121 >>

Re: network mystery!!??

On 27/03/2022 02:42, Jack Craig wrote: On Sat, Mar 26, 2022 at 1:57 AM Ed Greshko wrote: On 26/03/2022 16:33, Peter Boy wrote: > >> Am 26.03.2022 um 08:55 schrieb Ed Greshko : >> >> ws.linuxlighthouse.com has address 108.220.213.121 >>

Re: pipewire and wireplumber

DJ Delorie wrote "R. G. Newbury" writes: If you don't mind answering, was it a Rhode Island Red cockerel or a hen which you sacrificed to learn these arcane secrets? And, full-moon at midnight, or dark of the moon? Or did this take moving up to a goat? It took a LOT of googling to find the

Re: Setting netmask permanently

Would that I could. AFAIK those files are no longer used in Fedora 35. On Sat, Mar 26, 2022 at 4:11 PM Terry Polzin wrote: > have you edited /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-eno1 > > On Sat, Mar 26, 2022 at 6:42 PM Geoffrey Leach > wrote: > >> Device vendor insists on a netmask 255.255.0.0,

Re: Setting netmask permanently

On 3/26/22 20:17, Geoffrey Leach wrote: Would that I could. AFAIK those files are no longer used in Fedora 35. On Sat, Mar 26, 2022 at 4:11 PM Terry Polzin > wrote: have you edited /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-eno1 On Sat, Mar 26, 2022 at 6:42 PM Geo

Re: pipewire and wireplumber

On 3/26/22 21:16, R. G. Newbury wrote: And did that version have an exception for when the sacrifice is to be undertaken if being undertaken *in California*? Having spent most of my 72 years in California, I know that the most important thing is to make sure you're using black candles. __

Re: network mystery!!??

On Sat, 2022-03-26 at 11:22 -0700, Jack Craig wrote: > i had a remote friend try traceroute to 108.220.213.121 to show the > trace stopping at 108.90.204.76. > > i dont know why it stops short of my server??? Things only respond to pings if allowed to. Thanks to continual hacking attempts, many

Re: network mystery!!??

On Sat, Mar 26, 2022 at 5:27 PM Richard < inbound-lists-fed...@listmail.innovate.net> wrote: > > > > Date: Saturday, March 26, 2022 11:42:57 -0700 > > From: Jack Craig > > > > On Sat, Mar 26, 2022 at 1:57 AM Ed Greshko > > wrote: > > > >> On 26/03/2022 16:33, Peter Boy wrote: > >> > > >> >> Am 2

Re: network mystery!!??

On Sat, Mar 26, 2022 at 9:08 PM Tim via users wrote: > On Sat, 2022-03-26 at 11:22 -0700, Jack Craig wrote: > > i had a remote friend try traceroute to 108.220.213.121 to show the > > trace stopping at 108.90.204.76. > > > > i dont know why it stops short of my server??? > > Things only respond

Re: network mystery!!??

On Sat, Mar 26, 2022 at 8:00 PM Ed Greshko wrote: > On 27/03/2022 02:42, Jack Craig wrote: > > > > > > On Sat, Mar 26, 2022 at 1:57 AM Ed Greshko > wrote: > > > > On 26/03/2022 16:33, Peter Boy wrote: > > > > > >> Am 26.03.2022 um 08:55 schrieb Ed Greshko >: > > >> > > >> ws

Re: Setting netmask permanently

On Sat, 2022-03-26 at 15:41 -0700, Geoffrey Leach wrote: > Device vendor insists on a netmask 255.255.0.0, so > % ifconfig eno1 169.254.10.6 netmask 255.255.0.0 > which changes netmask, but it soon reverts to the original > value 255.255.255.255 > > ifdown/ifup does not change the situation Wha

Re: network mystery!!??

On 27/03/2022 12:19, Jack Craig wrote: after much wailing and gnashing of teeth, att did send a tech and for general internet access its fine. just not working with my configuration... at the moment, trying to find a static route option for att rtr. static routes on the internal router wont he

Re: network mystery!!??

On Sat, Mar 26, 2022 at 10:20 PM Ed Greshko wrote: > On 27/03/2022 12:19, Jack Craig wrote: > > after much wailing and gnashing of teeth, att did send a tech and for > general internet access its fine. > > just not working with my configuration... > > > > at the moment, trying to find a static ro

Re: network mystery!!??

On 27/03/2022 13:57, Jack Craig wrote: On Sat, Mar 26, 2022 at 10:20 PM Ed Greshko wrote: On 27/03/2022 12:19, Jack Craig wrote: > after much wailing and gnashing of teeth, att did send a tech and for general internet access its fine. > just not working with my configuration...

Re: network mystery!!??

On 3/26/22 22:57, Jack Craig wrote: (internet)---lan connect---nighthawk>--lan connect-[netgear switch]-- Now we're getting somewhere. Can you also assign the following IP addresses from your original email into that diagram? 10.0.0.101ws.linuxlighthouse.com (internal

Re: network mystery!!??

On Sat, Mar 26, 2022 at 11:14 PM Samuel Sieb wrote: > On 3/26/22 22:57, Jack Craig wrote: > > (internet)---lan connect--- > nighthawk>--lan connect-[netgear switch]-- > > Now we're getting somewhere. Can you also assign the following IP > addresses from your original email into that

Re: network mystery!!??

On Sat, Mar 26, 2022 at 11:06 PM Ed Greshko wrote: > On 27/03/2022 13:57, Jack Craig wrote: > > > > > > On Sat, Mar 26, 2022 at 10:20 PM Ed Greshko > wrote: > > > > On 27/03/2022 12:19, Jack Craig wrote: > > > after much wailing and gnashing of teeth, att did send a tech and > for genera

Re: network mystery!!??

On 27/03/2022 14:40, Jack Craig wrote: but srvr is on 10.0.0.101, att rtr is between 192.168.1.254 and 108.90.204.76. still make sense?? I see To test, I want you to make the server a static ip address of 108.220.213.121 and then connect it to the BGW210-700. It seems the BGW210-700 may