On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 01:22:23AM -0500, Bryan Hoover wrote:
> stan wrote:
> > Yes, I just erviewd the firewall config. It will pass all trafic
> > originating on the innsied. I see that may not be a good general case, but
> > it should be OK here (Small home network).
> > 
> > BTW, I decided to try (breifly) disabling all packet firewalling. Guess
> > what? cdcc still says "No servers responfing".
> 
> Did you try just pinging one or more of the DCC servers?

Yes, as a metter of facy, see this traceroute:


[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ traceroute -p 6277 dcc1.dcc-servers.net
traceroute: Warning: dcc1.dcc-servers.net has multiple addresses; using 208.201.249.232
traceroute to dcc.dcc-servers.net (208.201.249.232), 30 hops max, 38 byte packets
 1  koala (205.159.77.234)  1.053 ms  0.757 ms  3.248 ms
 2  10.116.72.1 (10.116.72.1)  9.190 ms  22.048 ms  33.081 ms
 3  172.30.75.81 (172.30.75.81)  9.644 ms  9.809 ms  8.370 ms
 4  172.30.75.122 (172.30.75.122)  8.596 ms  27.574 ms  9.224 ms
 5  12.124.58.77 (12.124.58.77)  19.150 ms  18.641 ms  20.646 ms
 6  gbr5-p80.attga.ip.att.net (12.123.21.74)  21.172 ms  32.190 ms  19.746 ms
 7  tbr2-p013501.attga.ip.att.net (12.122.12.41)  21.487 ms  27.284 ms  24.384 ms
 8  ggr1-p370.attga.ip.att.net (12.123.20.253)  21.536 ms  21.056 ms  20.245 ms
 9  att-gw.ny.cw.net (192.205.32.118)  21.074 ms  21.752 ms  20.048 ms
10  dcr1-loopback.SantaClara.cw.net (208.172.146.99)  82.517 ms  82.504 ms  98.134 ms
11  bpr1-so-0-0-0.SanJoseEquinix.cw.net (208.173.54.65)  81.197 ms  79.956 ms  106.910 
ms
12  208.173.54.46 (208.173.54.46)  77.201 ms  76.175 ms  76.272 ms
13  fast5-0-0.border.sr.sonic.net (64.142.0.13)  83.196 ms  512.588 ms  216.541 ms
14  fast0-1.dist2-1.sr.sonic.net (208.201.224.160)  84.227 ms  81.727 ms  89.809 ms
15  eth0.d.spam.sonic.net (208.201.249.232)  108.510 ms  85.306 ms  88.993 ms
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ 
Script done on Tue Dec  9 08:58:31 2003
> 
> Also, in addition to what Alex said about dccproc, dccifd is the daemon
> version.  SA will use either of them (in case you can't or don't want to
> use the daemon).

So, I don't have to run the daemon?
> 

-- 
"They that would give up essential liberty for temporary safety deserve
neither liberty nor safety."
                                                -- Benjamin Franklin


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials.
Become an expert in LINUX or just sharpen your skills.  Sign up for IBM's
Free Linux Tutorials.  Learn everything from the bash shell to sys admin.
Click now! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1278&alloc_id=3371&op=click
_______________________________________________
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

Reply via email to