- WLUG - wlug.mailman3.com

Re: [Wlug] Nvidia and 2.6.4

by Mike Frysinger

On Tuesday 13 April 2004 12:19 am, orbitz(a)ezabel.com wrote: > # CONFIG_DEBUG_KERNEL is not set > CONFIG_EARLY_PRINTK=y > CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK_SLEEP=y > # CONFIG_FRAME_POINTER is not set > > Change the SPINLOCK_SLEEP to n? yes, that should make those tracebacks 'disappear' -mike

April 13, 2004

RE: [Wlug] Next meeting - topic?

by Martin, Eric

I'm game -----Original Message----- From: Charles R. Anderson [mailto:cra@WPI.EDU] Sent: Monday, April 12, 2004 5:54 PM To: Worcester Linux Users Group Subject: Re: [Wlug] Next meeting - topic? Who wants to do a PGP Keysigning? It would involve advance preparation from everyone who would like to participate. By now I'd imagine most of you have gotten your feet wet with GnuPG :-) If not, see: http://www.wlug.org/files/pgp-slides/index.html If there is interest, please let me know in the next couple days so I can organize the procedure and send out instructions. _______________________________________________ Wlug mailing list Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug

April 13, 2004

Re: [Wlug] Nvidia and 2.6.4

by orbitz＠ezabel.com

# CONFIG_DEBUG_KERNEL is not set CONFIG_EARLY_PRINTK=y CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK_SLEEP=y # CONFIG_FRAME_POINTER is not set Change the SPINLOCK_SLEEP to n? Thanks, Malcolm On Mon, 12 Apr 2004 23:59:51 -0400 Mike Frysinger <vapier(a)gentoo.org> wrote: > On Monday 12 April 2004 11:38 pm, orbitz(a)ezabel.com wrote: > > Hello, I'm running gentoo with 2.6.4 kernel and my /var/log/messages is > > getting filled up with this junk: > > known problem ... turn off sleep checks inside of kernel debug > -mike > > _______________________________________________ > Wlug mailing list > Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org > http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug >

April 13, 2004

Re: [Wlug] Nvidia and 2.6.4

by Mike Frysinger

On Monday 12 April 2004 11:38 pm, orbitz(a)ezabel.com wrote: > Hello, I'm running gentoo with 2.6.4 kernel and my /var/log/messages is > getting filled up with this junk: known problem ... turn off sleep checks inside of kernel debug -mike

April 13, 2004

Nvidia and 2.6.4

by orbitz＠ezabel.com

Hello, I'm running gentoo with 2.6.4 kernel and my /var/log/messages is getting filled up with this junk: Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel Debug: sleeping function called from invalid context at mm/slab.c:1900 Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel in_atomic():1, irqs_disabled():0 Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel Call Trace: Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<c011a1ab>] __might_sleep+0xab/0xd0 Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<c013d0a6>] __kmalloc+0x96/0xa0 Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0b7db39>] os_alloc_mem+0x5c/0x87 [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0b97df0>] _nv001308rm+0x10/0x28 [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0cb058d>] _nv001518rm+0x7c9/0xb34 [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<c0109588>] common_interrupt+0x18/0x20 Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0c34d61>] _nv002465rm+0x81/0x420 [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0c34d78>] _nv002465rm+0x98/0x420 [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0b8d965>] _nv001338rm+0x1d/0x24 [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0b7e555>] _nv005601rm+0xd/0x34 [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0b85c38>] _nv000858rm+0x300/0xe14 [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<c0124bca>] run_timer_softirq+0x10a/0x1b0 Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<c0124d5f>] do_timer+0xdf/0xf0 Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<c010b16d>] do_IRQ+0xfd/0x130 Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<c0109588>] common_interrupt+0x18/0x20 Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0b81eed>] _nv002962rm+0x2c5/0x3b8 [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0b9c8a9>] _nv000899rm+0x4c9/0xf70 [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0b9c8bc>] _nv000899rm+0x4dc/0xf70 [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0ba2df9>] _nv004363rm+0x59/0x90 [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0bc05ea>] _nv005046rm+0x52/0x70 [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0ba2d02>] _nv004679rm+0x1be/0x1d0 [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<c0117fba>] wake_up_state+0x1a/0x20 Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<c0126c31>] send_group_sig_info+0x31/0x60 Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<c016380b>] send_sigio_to_task+0xeb/0x100 Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0b8d7fe>] _nv001344rm+0x46/0x6c [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0cb545a>] _nv001480rm+0x3a/0x7c [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<c0163872>] send_sigio+0x52/0xf0 Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<c0267b78>] get_device+0x18/0x30 Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<c02ce9c7>] uhci_submit_common+0x1f7/0x2b0 Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<c0117fba>] wake_up_state+0x1a/0x20 Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<c0126c31>] send_group_sig_info+0x31/0x60 Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0cf912f>] _nv000176rm+0x57/0x3ec [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<c018c9ac>] ext3_get_block_handle+0xac/0x360 Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<c0138535>] mempool_alloc+0x75/0x160 Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<c011a5e0>] autoremove_wake_function+0x0/0x50 Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<c0138535>] mempool_alloc+0x75/0x160 Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0b8d965>] _nv001338rm+0x1d/0x24 [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0bb2eac>] _nv005307rm+0x54/0x544 [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0c6369b>] _nv001532rm+0x1f/0x28 [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0c6364c>] _nv001534rm+0x20/0x28 [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0c63e42>] _nv003621rm+0x1a/0x20 [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0cfa708>] _nv000183rm+0x750/0x774 [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0c6369b>] _nv001532rm+0x1f/0x28 [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0c63e81>] _nv003619rm+0x19/0x20 [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0cb29f3>] _nv003073rm+0x1b/0x30 [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0cf912f>] _nv000176rm+0x57/0x3ec [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0b8d7da>] _nv001344rm+0x22/0x6c [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0c637db>] _nv001556rm+0x5b/0x6c [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0b8d7da>] _nv001344rm+0x22/0x6c [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0c637db>] _nv001556rm+0x5b/0x6c [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0b8d7da>] _nv001344rm+0x22/0x6c [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0c637db>] _nv001556rm+0x5b/0x6c [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0c637db>] _nv001556rm+0x5b/0x6c [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0c637db>] _nv001556rm+0x5b/0x6c [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<c0117d1e>] recalc_task_prio+0x8e/0x1b0 Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0cf912f>] _nv000176rm+0x57/0x3ec [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<c03337f4>] kfree_skbmem+0x24/0x30 Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<c033385a>] __kfree_skb+0x5a/0xc0 Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<c032fc78>] sock_aio_read+0xb8/0xd0 Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<c015142b>] do_sync_read+0x8b/0xc0 Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0b9bfb1>] rm_ioctl+0x19/0x20 [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0b7ba08>] nv_kern_ioctl+0x4de/0x529 [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0b9a901>] _nv000865rm+0x3d/0x48 [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<e0b7ba78>] nv_kern_isr+0x25/0x5c [nvidia] Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<c0151550>] vfs_read+0xf0/0x130 Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<c0163f13>] sys_ioctl+0xf3/0x2a0 Apr 12 23:16:47 sentinel [<c010941b>] syscall_call+0x7/0xb It seems pretty nvidia related, and I had this rpoblem before, but updating my kernel seems to have brought it back. Does anyone have any idea how to fix this? I suppose if worst comes to worst I can try to revert back to 2.6.2 or 3. Thanks, Malcolm

April 13, 2004

Re: [Wlug] Next meeting - topic?

by doug waud

Hi Chuck Charles R. Anderson wrote: > Who wants to do a PGP Keysigning? It would involve advance > preparation from everyone who would like to participate. By now I'd > imagine most of you have gotten your feet wet with GnuPG :-) If not, > see: > > http://www.wlug.org/files/pgp-slides/index.html > > If there is interest, please let me know in the next couple days so I > can organize the procedure and send out instructions. I have been dragging my feet but, with your posting, got gpg and got to the first step of you slides, gpg --gen-key At that point, I could not remember what default type you had recommended. I realize this is not critical, but like to stick to the same as the rest of the crowd in a KISS mode. :-) So, if you'll pick a default, I'll go on to the next step and report back for help at the next stumble :-) Oh Yes. Count me in as interested! Thanks for volunteering. doug

April 13, 2004

Re: [Wlug] Next meeting - topic?

by Theo Van Dinter

On Mon, Apr 12, 2004 at 05:53:55PM -0400, Charles R. Anderson wrote: > Who wants to do a PGP Keysigning? It would involve advance > preparation from everyone who would like to participate. By now I'd > imagine most of you have gotten your feet wet with GnuPG :-) If not, > see: > > http://www.wlug.org/files/pgp-slides/index.html > > If there is interest, please let me know in the next couple days so I > can organize the procedure and send out instructions. I'd be game. Who wouldn't want to travel to Worcester with passport in hand? ;) BTW: I ran the 2 keysignings at LISA 03 and had http://www.biglumber.com/ recommended to me as a useful site to organize key signings in the future. I haven't poked around it too much, but it may make life easier. :) -- Randomly Generated Tagline: How do Crays and Alphas handle the POSIX problem? -- Larry Wall in <199709050042.RAA29379(a)wall.org>

April 12, 2004

Re: [Wlug] Next meeting - topic?

by Charles R. Anderson

Who wants to do a PGP Keysigning? It would involve advance preparation from everyone who would like to participate. By now I'd imagine most of you have gotten your feet wet with GnuPG :-) If not, see: http://www.wlug.org/files/pgp-slides/index.html If there is interest, please let me know in the next couple days so I can organize the procedure and send out instructions.

April 12, 2004

Next meeting - topic?

by Andy Stewart

HI all, We have a meeting coming up on Thursday, April 22, but we have neither a topic nor a speaker. Since I am fully consumed in my job search and the layoff process, I won't be able to do a presentation this month. I am seeking a volunteer - please?? :-) Now, now, don't push and shove, I know many of you are eager for such a challenge. Please contact me by email and we can work out the details. Thanks in advance! Andy -- Andy Stewart, Founder Worcester Linux Users' Group Worcester, MA USA http://www.wlug.org

April 12, 2004

Re: [Wlug] Verizon DSL on SuSE

by Josh Huber

Frank Sweetser <fs(a)WPI.EDU> writes: > That doesn't always work. Not all of these attacks require that the > packet sent to your machine be sent to what your machine believes is > the broadcast address for your subnet. True. I suppose some simple rate limiting would do the trick for this as a general solution... (-m limit --limit 2/second type thing) > Think of it this way. Would you leave your back door unlocked and > open just because you've only seen people come in and out of the > front door? Well, we are talking about ping here. -- Josh Huber

April 9, 2004

Re: [Wlug] Verizon DSL on SuSE

by Frank Sweetser

On Fri, Apr 09, 2004 at 11:19:19AM -0400, Josh Huber wrote: > Frank Sweetser <fs(a)WPI.EDU> writes: > > > How about the fact that if you don't, you're open to acting as an > > unwitting participant in a smurf/fraggle amplification DoS? > > I suppose, if you don't enable things like the rp_filter (or > equivalent with iptables) and > > echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/icmp_echo_ignore_broadcasts > > I doubt anyone keeps udp echo enabled these days. That doesn't always work. Not all of these attacks require that the packet sent to your machine be sent to what your machine believes is the broadcast address for your subnet. Think of it this way. Would you leave your back door unlocked and open just because you've only seen people come in and out of the front door? -- Frank Sweetser fs at wpi.edu WPI Network Engineer GPG fingerprint = 6174 1257 129E 0D21 D8D4 E8A3 8E39 29E3 E2E8 8CEC

April 9, 2004

Re: [Wlug] Verizon DSL on SuSE

by Josh Huber

Frank Sweetser <fs(a)WPI.EDU> writes: > How about the fact that if you don't, you're open to acting as an > unwitting participant in a smurf/fraggle amplification DoS? I suppose, if you don't enable things like the rp_filter (or equivalent with iptables) and echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/icmp_echo_ignore_broadcasts I doubt anyone keeps udp echo enabled these days. -- Josh Huber

April 9, 2004

RE: [Wlug] Verizon DSL on SuSE

by Martin, Eric

Please elaborate. I know what a DDoS and DoS are, but smurf/fraggle amplication; now I'm lost. -----Original Message----- From: Frank Sweetser [mailto:fs@WPI.EDU] Sent: Friday, April 09, 2004 10:53 AM To: wlug(a)mail.wlug.org Subject: Re: [Wlug] Verizon DSL on SuSE On Fri, Apr 09, 2004 at 10:50:18AM -0400, Josh Huber wrote: > "Martin, Eric" <MartinE(a)worc.k12.ma.us> writes: > > > I personally have my firewall configured to drop pings. If they > > don't know you're there, you aren't a target. Granted it doesn't > > keep seasoned hackers off your box, but it's one more piece of > > security. > > I don't buy that argument. Two situations: How about the fact that if you don't, you're open to acting as an unwitting participant in a smurf/fraggle amplification DoS? -- Frank Sweetser fs at wpi.edu WPI Network Engineer GPG fingerprint = 6174 1257 129E 0D21 D8D4 E8A3 8E39 29E3 E2E8 8CEC _______________________________________________ Wlug mailing list Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug

April 9, 2004

RE: [Wlug] Verizon DSL on SuSE

by Martin, Eric

I have 0 visible services, but I still don't want people doing port scans. Why pose a target when I don't have to. There is no reason why anybody should be pinging my house. Therefore, I don't let them. Why would I enable anything to let people see me? Stardard security practice: Only allow what is *needed*, and I don't *need* anybody pinging me. If I do, I'll turn it on. Eric -----Original Message----- From: Josh Huber [mailto:huber@alum.wpi.edu] Sent: Friday, April 09, 2004 10:50 AM To: wlug(a)mail.wlug.org Subject: Re: [Wlug] Verizon DSL on SuSE "Martin, Eric" <MartinE(a)worc.k12.ma.us> writes: > I personally have my firewall configured to drop pings. If they don't > know you're there, you aren't a target. Granted it doesn't keep > seasoned hackers off your box, but it's one more piece of security. I don't buy that argument. Two situations: 1) You have no other internet-visible services: * What's the harm in allowing icmp echo? Who cares, unless there happens to be some vulnerable ICMP code in the kernel. I suppose that's a risk I'd be willing to take. :) 2) You have other internet-visible services: * A port scan will reveal you, regardless of ICMP responses. -- Josh Huber _______________________________________________ Wlug mailing list Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug

April 9, 2004

Re: [Wlug] Verizon DSL on SuSE

by Frank Sweetser

On Fri, Apr 09, 2004 at 10:50:18AM -0400, Josh Huber wrote: > "Martin, Eric" <MartinE(a)worc.k12.ma.us> writes: > > > I personally have my firewall configured to drop pings. If they > > don't know you're there, you aren't a target. Granted it doesn't > > keep seasoned hackers off your box, but it's one more piece of > > security. > > I don't buy that argument. Two situations: How about the fact that if you don't, you're open to acting as an unwitting participant in a smurf/fraggle amplification DoS? -- Frank Sweetser fs at wpi.edu WPI Network Engineer GPG fingerprint = 6174 1257 129E 0D21 D8D4 E8A3 8E39 29E3 E2E8 8CEC

April 9, 2004

Re: [Wlug] Verizon DSL on SuSE

by Josh Huber

"Martin, Eric" <MartinE(a)worc.k12.ma.us> writes: > I personally have my firewall configured to drop pings. If they > don't know you're there, you aren't a target. Granted it doesn't > keep seasoned hackers off your box, but it's one more piece of > security. I don't buy that argument. Two situations: 1) You have no other internet-visible services: * What's the harm in allowing icmp echo? Who cares, unless there happens to be some vulnerable ICMP code in the kernel. I suppose that's a risk I'd be willing to take. :) 2) You have other internet-visible services: * A port scan will reveal you, regardless of ICMP responses. -- Josh Huber

April 9, 2004

Re: [Wlug] Verizon DSL on SuSE

by doug waud

Hi again Gregory Avedissian wrote: > Well, I needed to do something, because it was acting weird. The screen > was stalling for a couple seconds at a time, every few seconds. It was > too annoying to proceed. Yes, I see that occasionally with KDE. But again, that is not Linux per se. I suspect KDE is not quite ready for prime time. :-) When this happens to me, I just CTRL/ALT/Fn to a plain terminal, init 3 (to kill the Xwindow mess) and then init 5 to restart it. Unless KDE is so screwed up that it has trashed to keyboard, this should work without rebooting. > This seems to happen after doing NIC setup in yast. Maybe I'll try it > again to see if restarting the network helps. I admit that Yast strikes me as slso a bit dodgy. But again, the rcnetwork restart and/or init 3 then 5 should bail you out. doug

April 9, 2004

RE: [Wlug] Verizon DSL on SuSE

by Martin, Eric

I personally have my firewall configured to drop pings. If they don't know you're there, you aren't a target. Granted it doesn't keep seasoned hackers off your box, but it's one more piece of security. -----Original Message----- From: Josh Huber [mailto:huber@alum.wpi.edu] Sent: Thursday, April 08, 2004 10:50 AM To: wlug(a)mail.wlug.org Subject: Re: [Wlug] Verizon DSL on SuSE avedis(a)rcn.com writes: > [...] > then could surf, with download speeds up to 1.7M/s. Just curious, is that bytes or bits? (I wasn't aware of verizon offering such a fast link) > I even got my firewall working with the new connection, but two things > seems to have changed. SuSEfirewall2 was set not to accept pings, and > it looks like it's still set that way, but Gibson Research's port > scanning utility can ping me. The other thing is that before, I had to > manually enter commands > (iptables) to drop packets to port 119 to put it into "stealth" mode. > Now, I don't have to do that, as it already appears stealthed. Can > anyone explain either of these phenomena? I'm not sure why you would want to drop all pings. You'll probably find that the default firewalling rules drop some kinds of ICMP packets, but there are some which are useful to keep around. (personally, I think dropping all inbound ICMP is pretty annoying when trying to diagnose network issues...) As for port 119, this appears to be the NNTP (net news) port -- why would you be running a news server I'm not sure :) -- Josh Huber _______________________________________________ Wlug mailing list Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug

April 9, 2004

Re: [Wlug] Verizon DSL on SuSE

by Gregory Avedissian

Well, I needed to do something, because it was acting weird. The screen was stalling for a couple seconds at a time, every few seconds. It was too annoying to proceed. This seems to happen after doing NIC setup in yast. Maybe I'll try it again to see if restarting the network helps. Thanks. Greg doug waud wrote: > Hi greg > > avedis(a)rcn.com wrote: > > (snip,snip) > > I only had to make one file edit, > >> to designate eth0 in pppoe.conf, rebooted the computer and >> then could surf, > > > That "rebooted the computer" caught my eye. This is Linux, not Windows, > you don't need to reboot. In SuSE you can just shutdown and restart the > network with > rcnetwork restart > (rcnetwork is just a script in /sbin. You can browse it with less if you > want to see the gory details.) > > doug > > > > _______________________________________________ > Wlug mailing list > Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org > http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug > >

April 8, 2004

Re: [Wlug] Verizon DSL on SuSE

by doug waud

Hi greg avedis(a)rcn.com wrote: (snip,snip) I only had to make one file edit, > to designate eth0 in pppoe.conf, rebooted the computer and > then could surf, That "rebooted the computer" caught my eye. This is Linux, not Windows, you don't need to reboot. In SuSE you can just shutdown and restart the network with rcnetwork restart (rcnetwork is just a script in /sbin. You can browse it with less if you want to see the gory details.) doug

April 8, 2004

Re: [Wlug] Verizon DSL on SuSE

by Josh Huber

avedis(a)rcn.com writes: > Bits, I think. Whatever they advertise as supplying 1.5meg down and > 128k up. I'm at the bottom of the hill from the phone company, so > maybe that helps. I downloaded knoppix (700MB) in a little more than > an hour. Okay, that makes more sense :) > I don't know enough to have an answer. How many kinds of ICMP are > there? The firewall config file gives three choices - > > # Allow (or don't) ICMP echo pings on either the firewall or the dmz > # from the internet? The internet option is for allowing the DMZ and > # the internal network to ping the internet. > FW_ALLOW_PING_FW="no" > FW_ALLOW_PING_DMZ="no" > FW_ALLOW_PING_EXT="no" > > I understand that the first two determine whether the firewall > or the dmz respond to pings from the internet, but I'm not > sure what the third option does. I am able to ping out to the > internet, even though it's set to 'no', so I don't understand > the last comment. I'm not sure why you would want to block outbound pings, but that sounds like the intended behavior of the last option in the list. You probably don't use a DMZ configuration, so the first should just disallow inbound pings. Can you test if incoming pings are replied to? What's you IP address? > Woops. I meant port 113, identd/auth. Ah, I'm sure they don't run/firewall idend by default... -- Josh Huber

April 8, 2004

Re: [Wlug] Verizon DSL on SuSE

by avedis＠rcn.com

Josh Huber wrote: > avedis(a)rcn.com writes: > > >>[...] >>then could surf, with download speeds up to 1.7M/s. > > Just curious, is that bytes or bits? (I wasn't aware of verizon > offering such a fast link)> Bits, I think. Whatever they advertise as supplying 1.5meg down and 128k up. I'm at the bottom of the hill from the phone company, so maybe that helps. I downloaded knoppix (700MB) in a little more than an hour. > > I'm not sure why you would want to drop all pings. You'll probably > find that the default firewalling rules drop some kinds of ICMP > packets, but there are some which are useful to keep > around. (personally, I think dropping all inbound ICMP is pretty > annoying when trying to diagnose network issues...) > I don't know enough to have an answer. How many kinds of ICMP are there? The firewall config file gives three choices - # Allow (or don't) ICMP echo pings on either the firewall or the dmz from # the internet? The internet option is for allowing the DMZ and the internal # network to ping the internet. FW_ALLOW_PING_FW="no" FW_ALLOW_PING_DMZ="no" FW_ALLOW_PING_EXT="no" I understand that the first two determine whether the firewall or the dmz respond to pings from the internet, but I'm not sure what the third option does. I am able to ping out to the internet, even though it's set to 'no', so I don't understand the last comment. > As for port 119, this appears to be the NNTP (net news) port -- why > would you be running a news server I'm not sure :) > Woops. I meant port 113, identd/auth. Thanks, Greg

April 8, 2004

Re: [Wlug] Verizon DSL on SuSE

by Josh Huber

avedis(a)rcn.com writes: > [...] > then could surf, with download speeds up to 1.7M/s. Just curious, is that bytes or bits? (I wasn't aware of verizon offering such a fast link) > I even got my firewall working with the new connection, but > two things seems to have changed. SuSEfirewall2 was set not to > accept pings, and it looks like it's still set that way, but > Gibson Research's port scanning utility can ping me. The other > thing is that before, I had to manually enter commands > (iptables) to drop packets to port 119 to put it into > "stealth" mode. Now, I don't have to do that, as it already > appears stealthed. Can anyone explain either of these phenomena? I'm not sure why you would want to drop all pings. You'll probably find that the default firewalling rules drop some kinds of ICMP packets, but there are some which are useful to keep around. (personally, I think dropping all inbound ICMP is pretty annoying when trying to diagnose network issues...) As for port 119, this appears to be the NNTP (net news) port -- why would you be running a news server I'm not sure :) -- Josh Huber

April 8, 2004

Verizon DSL on SuSE

by avedis＠rcn.com

I got set up yesterday with Verizon DSL. I had to boot into windows to do the account activation, and their tech support walked me through it. Once the connection was up, I added a hub and a second computer (with XP - it's not mine, I swear) opened a browser and began surfing. Setting up DSL on SuSE 8.2 was pretty easy, considering I don't really know what I'm doing. Yast setup for a network card and dsl went smoothly. I only had to make one file edit, to designate eth0 in pppoe.conf, rebooted the computer and then could surf, with download speeds up to 1.7M/s. I even got my firewall working with the new connection, but two things seems to have changed. SuSEfirewall2 was set not to accept pings, and it looks like it's still set that way, but Gibson Research's port scanning utility can ping me. The other thing is that before, I had to manually enter commands (iptables) to drop packets to port 119 to put it into "stealth" mode. Now, I don't have to do that, as it already appears stealthed. Can anyone explain either of these phenomena? Greg

April 8, 2004

RE: [Wlug] Re: WLUG IRC anywhere?

by Martin, Eric

That's where I am now. Heck I'll even settle for being able to coax it out of the user, along with processor and RAM info...but some people you can't even get that far. (Yes all my windows are closed, it's Winter!!!) Eric -----Original Message----- From: Bill Smith [mailto:wsmith@chezsmith.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 07, 2004 3:29 PM To: Worcester Linux Users Group Subject: Re: [Wlug] Re: WLUG IRC anywhere? On Wed, 7 Apr 2004 09:06:51 -0400 "Martin, Eric" <MartinE(a)worc.k12.ma.us> wrote: > Here Here!!! Granted I've gotten into a debate with a friend of mine and > have slowly came to the conclusion that not everybody needs to know > *everything* about a computer to work one, but directories and applications > are a good start :) Worst one is when you ask and aol user for their email > addy, and they tell you HappyGoLucky127 (generally you can just assume the > @aol.com) I'll take that.... trying to know the why's and wherefore's of a computer before using one is like trying to know the intimate details of how a car works before driving one. all i ask from a user is that s/he know enough about the system they are using so that if i ask "what OS are you using?", i don't get a blank look. (i've gotten a lot of them, believe me.) -- William Smith wsmith(a)chezsmith.com Fall River, MA _______________________________________________ Wlug mailing list Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug

April 8, 2004