To Ken Schneider, RE: Suse Linux Server elaboratation
----- Original Message ----- From: "Ken Schneider" <suseseclist@rtsx.com> To: suse-security@suse.com Sent: Sunday, March 07, 2004 12:28 PM Subject: [suse-security] Suse Linux Server elaboratation
---------------------------------------------------------------
To put things breafly i am all but lost in the depths of linux. I am currently running samba on the server, it is lacated on an isolated network with test computers so that i don't mess up my good computers. I will be running with a 56k :( internet connection (after resolving my modem problems) and i am hoping to achive dial on demand over the network an well as having a logon server. i am still new to linux but am learning fast. I just took a look at the manual and i will probably be attempting to set up squid now that i know what it is. The network is running with work groups, not a domain (yet), all computers have a gatway of 192.168.1.255 netmask of 255.255.255.0 and all ip addresses begin with 192.168.1.___. I have good experience configuring windows clients but nothing on the server side. I hope this new info helps.
One item I see that will be a problem is the address you show for the gateway, 192.168.1.255/255.255.255.0. Since this is the broadcast address for the subnet your are using this will not work. 192.168.1.1 - 192.168.1.254 are the only usable addresses for this subnet/netmask combo. I think you should change that first to eliminate future network problems. Get the networking between the PC's working first and then start on getting your internet access working, samba and then squid so that you have a better understanding on how all the components work together. Ken Schneider Also, go one step at a time and document what you do for future reference. I don't quite understand because i currently have a Win 2000 Pro and a Win 98 SE set up on the Isolated network with the Linux Box and they can all see and/or ping each other easily, as well a share files. I also have a second netwr with 2 Win XP, 1 Win 98, and a Win 2000 Pro all of which have that same config and none of them have any problems. On all windows computers i am running tcp/ip, ipx..., and netbios protocalls, that is if this changes anything. I beleave that i might have hade a complaint from my linux box on this subject but it was when i was configuring samba and all i had to do to fix it was to use the network restart command at the prompt. FadMart - http://www.fadmart.com - An Associate of the World's Largest Store!
One item I see that will be a problem is the address you show for the gateway, 192.168.1.255/255.255.255.0. Since this is the broadcast address for the subnet your are using this will not work. 192.168.1.1 - 192.168.1.254 are the only usable addresses for this subnet/netmask combo. I think you should change that first to eliminate future network problems.
Get the networking between the PC's working first and then start on getting your internet access working, samba and then squid so that you have a better understanding on how all the components work together.
Ken Schneider Also, go one step at a time and document what you do for future reference.
I don't quite understand because i currently have a Win 2000 Pro and a Win 98 SE set up on the Isolated network with the Linux Box and they can all see and/or ping each other easily, as well a share files. I also have a second netwr with 2 Win XP, 1 Win 98, and a Win 2000 Pro all of which have that same config and none of them have any problems. On all windows computers i am running tcp/ip, ipx..., and netbios protocalls, that is if this changes anything. I beleave that i might have hade a complaint from my linux box on this subject but it was when i was configuring samba and all i had to do to fix it was to use the network restart command at the prompt.
Then you need to do a little more reading on tcp/ip networking. X.X.X.255 is always the broadcast address for a class "C" subnetted (255.255.255.0) network and should not be used as a "host" address. ipx and netbios don't use tcp/ip network addressing and is propabbly why you have been able to get away with it. Also please do not reply to me and the list as I just did to you. You end up getting two copies of the same email as you can see. Ken
participants (2)
-
Ken Schneider
-
Scott Wrobel