Language:
switch to room list switch to menu My folders
Go to page: First ... 32 33 34 35 [36] 37 38 39 40 41
[#] Fri May 30 2014 00:27:02 EDT from ax25 @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

http://tldp.org/HOWTO/AX25-HOWTO/x495.html

Look at 6.1.11

I need to give this a shot.  Sounds like fun!



[#] Fri May 30 2014 08:35:55 EDT from fleeb @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]


Gads... my English there is atrocious. What the hell is happening to me?

[#] Fri May 30 2014 08:35:36 EDT from fleeb @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]


Mind if, if it's ax.25 over TCP/IP, I can't use it. That's one of the things I'm researching as I look over these things.

And from what I've seen, the only way I can get around using TCP/IP involves building a protocol driver for Windows. User-land stacks seem to go over TCP/IP in the end, which isn't helpful t ome.

[#] Fri May 30 2014 11:40:36 EDT from ax25 @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

BPQether is not ip ethernet framing 0x800, it is 0x08ff.  Probably not good if you are routing as it most likely won't get routed properly.



[#] Fri May 30 2014 12:58:15 EDT from fleeb @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]


So how does one manage to use such a stack in userland without having the operating system (in my case, Windows) complaining that it doesn't know anything about that framing (e.g. it can't build a socket for that framing)?

[#] Fri May 30 2014 13:00:34 EDT from fleeb @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]


(looked over the link you sent)

Yep, Linux. Trivial, after a fashion, in Linux.

But for Windows, I need to take the source, and seriously rework some things to make it provide a protocol mini-filter that would work for Windows.

Which is tempting in some ways. I'd love to do it just for shits and giggles.

[#] Fri May 30 2014 17:19:53 EDT from ax25 @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

I have not tried this since the days of DOS, but BPQ32 might fit the bill:

http://www.cantab.net/users/john.wiseman/Documents/BPQ32.html

More specifically the driver here:

http://www.cantab.net/users/john.wiseman/Documents/BPQ%20Ethernet.htm



[#] Fri May 30 2014 22:44:50 EDT from vince-q @ Cascade Lodge BBS

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

May 30 2014 2:19pm from ax25 @uncnsrd (Uncensored)
I have not tried this since the days of DOS, but BPQ32 might fit the
bill:

http://www.cantab.net/users/john.wiseman/Documents/BPQ32.html

More specifically the driver here:

http://www.cantab.net/users/john.wiseman/Documents/BPQ%20Ethernet.htm


And lest we forget, KA9Q 'NOS' may also be helpful... ;)

--K2NE

[#] Sat May 31 2014 20:58:55 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Hmm... on Windows, changing the ethertype seems to be more involved.

I haven't figured that out yet. There must be a way, though...

Yes, there's an easy way. RTOOS !

(I know, I know ... but it had to be said)

[#] Tue Jul 08 2014 13:41:19 EDT from catamik @ Uncensored

Subject: sendcommand

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Hi

 

Who is familiar with remote sendcommand utility usage. I mean to use the sendcommand in a remote manner. remoteley I send to server machine with citadel server installed and running.

The client machine has a second server installation as I would like to use the sendcommand utlity shipped with it.

the command i run on the ubuntu client side is

 

sudo sendcommand ip 23 ICAL putics jimmi.ical

 

as documentation says

 

sendcommand [remotehost [remoteport]] Citadelcommand


Thank you, Thank you very much



[#] Tue Jul 08 2014 13:59:36 EDT from dothebart @ Uncensored

Subject: Re: sendcommand

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

 

Tue Jul 08 2014 13:41:19 EDT from catamik @ Uncensored Subject: sendcommand

Hi

 

Who is familiar with remote sendcommand utility usage. I mean to use the sendcommand in a remote manner. remoteley I send to server machine with citadel server installed and running.

The client machine has a second server installation as I would like to use the sendcommand utlity shipped with it.

the command i run on the ubuntu client side is

 

sudo sendcommand ip 23 ICAL putics jimmi.ical

 

as documentation says

 

sendcommand [remotehost [remoteport]] Citadelcommand


Thank you, Thank you very much



though its citadel networking this is rather a question for the citadel support room ;-)

sendcommand meanwhile lost the ability to do remote connections; only unix domain socket connections are supported anymore.

This is for security reasons; since its only intended for administrative purposes.

it wasn't intended for what you're trying to do in first place. It can't execute a sequence of commands, so you can only run commands which make sense whithout a certain context and environment like the RWHO command.

Did you already have a look at:

http://citadel.org/doku.php/faq:generalquestions:i_want_to_automate

?

the netcat example may be a good startingpoint for you.



[#] Thu Sep 18 2014 07:05:22 EDT from fleeb @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]


After a full week of hellish delivery nonsense with FedEx, I finally received my new hardware firewall from pfSense.

It has no fans, but it doesn't get very hot (just a tad warm, but cooler than some of the switches I've had). When it starts, after establishing a WAN connection, it plays a little tune, which I didn't quite expect.

I've used the pfSense software before. This thing has tons of bells and whistles that should help me manage anything I might want to manage in my network.

It has three NICs... one labelled 'WAN', another labelled 'LAN', and one more labelled 'OPT'. I think for most home offices, this is perfect; the WAN obviously connects nicely with the cable modem (or DSL, or whatever), the LAN for the home computers that we use for browsing the internet or playing games or whatever, and I could use OPT for servers that I'd like to run from home.

Not that it matters how you actually set things up; the firewall treats each of these equally, allowing tremendous flexibility in how you set up your environment.
But they do have some preliminary things set up that makes using the ports in this fashion more convenient.

I haven't researched it yet, but it's my understanding this thing can allow you to set up another set of IP addresses isolated from the usual set of IP addresses that allow certain machines to communicate with each other in a different network, yet the same ethernet segment. Depending on how fancy I get with it, I might set up servers in OPT, and configure another set of addresses for communicating with those servers such that only specific machines have access to them for maintenance purposes, just as added security.

Or whatever. I've always kind of found this sort of thing nifty, but I haven't had anything powerful enough to really play around.

[#] Sat Sep 20 2014 02:00:56 EDT from ax25 @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

pFsense is pretty cool stuff.  I have a few in place and it has (for the most part) done what I wanted.  There were rough edges that burned you for a bit in the earlier releases that seem to have been smoothed out in the later ones.  You can do some complicated plumbing with those little boxes.



[#] Sat Sep 20 2014 10:33:31 EDT from fleeb @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]


I'm dipping in it now.

It has already addressed one of the little problems that annoyed me... something related to occasional failed DNS queries from my original router.

Those queries are FAST. Very nice.

I have some new problems (my fault), but I figure eventually I'll figure out how to resolve those. I divided my home into two networks because I didn't have the logistics for the single network at the moment. Now, because my printer is in another subnet, even though I can access that subnet, my computer doesn't seem to want to work with it.

I want to replace all my switches anyway. They are all old 100T switches, and I think 1000T seems to be normal these days.

[#] Mon Sep 22 2014 01:19:53 EDT from ax25 @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

fleeb, your home network sounds a bit more complicated than mine.  Let us know what you find out, as I might learn something.



[#] Mon Sep 22 2014 08:30:17 EDT from fleeb @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]


A few things...

1. The fucking cable modem that Comcast gave me doesn't do IPv6. So, if I want to play with IPv6 in the general Internet, I need to replace this modem.
I want Comcast to do it... and since I'm a business customer, I can simply cite a business need for it. Which is actually fairly true; I want to test IPv6 for professional reasons.

2. It turns out, I can communicate with the printer just fine on the other subnet. In fact, I can communicate with all the machines on the other subnet without issue... pfSense is doing its job quite nicely, without having to do much with the firewall. I had mistaken the lack of pings to one of the computers on the other side as a sign that the packets were not making it there, when in fact, they were, but Microsoft doesn't respond to pings outside of its current subnet. When I pinged the printer directly, I got responses.
So, getting the printer to work is more a matter of figuring out how to deal with the damned drivers for the printer than networking... and the way to solve that is to put the machine to communicate with the printer on the other subnet, configure the printer, then return to my normal subnet. I haven't done this yet, but I know it'll work.

3. I'm going to hold off on changing my switches. I want to let my money build up for a little bit before I buy some gigabit switches. This will give me a chance to research the kind of switches I want, etc.

My home network isn't really that complicated, but it probably will be as I experiment with features. I only really have the following:

1. Two regularly-used computers that do the heaviest networking.
2. Wireless router for cell phones and laptops (visiting or personal).
3. Chromecast device on my television set, which communicates wirelessly.
4. A tablet that can act as a full-fledged Microsoft OS 8.1 computer (for developing closed-captioning stuff).
5. Raspberry Pi for playing/research
6. Two old laptops, one of which I think I'm giving away to Melvin's aunt.
7. Two cell phones, one decommissioned but used occasionally for two-phase password crap that I haven't shifted to the other cell phone, and the other I use as an actual cell-phone.
8. An Android tablet

Several of these devices work wirelessly, and I suspect I want to ensure all the wireless stuff works over an alternative set of IP addresses rather than the current set, just to keep them separated from the other machines.
That might be my first goal, to try and segregate wireless from wired (apparently, my wireless router is more of a wireless bridge than router).

[#] Wed Sep 24 2014 07:07:29 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

If you've got a real firewall on your network, turn off the stupid Windows Firewall. It's only going to give you THE PAIN.

[#] Wed Sep 24 2014 08:30:24 EDT from fleeb @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]


The fact that I have Windows machines in my network gives me The Pain.

[#] Wed Sep 24 2014 14:16:23 EDT from vince-q @ Cascade Lodge BBS

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Sep 24 2014 5:30am from fleeb @uncnsrd (Uncensored)

The fact that I have Windows machines in my network gives me The Pain.




As well it should!

[#] Mon Sep 29 2014 09:55:28 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

The fact that I have Windows machines in my network gives me The Pain.


That's just the blunt force trauma from Ballmer throwing a chair at you.

Go to page: First ... 32 33 34 35 [36] 37 38 39 40 41