Well, I've got my gateway box, Thunderbird, talking to the
world [0] and all the rest of the computers on the LAN.
And the thing I'm proudest of is that I can put the
Dozers on DHCP, and serve up both an IP and the internet.
I'm seriously thinking of putting my whole saga on a
web page somewhere - in fact, last night I took some
time to judiciously copy some of my config files to
/D/Techno so I can peruse them from Doze. I haven't got
Samba going yet - it's running as the daemons; with
Vehicle running Slack, I can log onto Thunderbird just
like a smbclient. But when I click "Computers near Me,"
I get:

Workgroup is not accessible.
The account is not authorized to log in from this station.

I'll be looking for the fix for that tonight. It'll probably
just not be there any more just by _looking_ at the config
file. ;-)

But, I'm wondering about terminology. All the compters
are configured to use DHCP, but have the nameserver called
out. The gateway is 192.168.0.1, (which the properties
window doesn't let you set, but I guess calling it out
would be kind of redundant) and I've got IP masquerading
going. eth0 in Thunderbird, of course, is you. ?:-)

So, what's this called? Is Thunderbird a Router? It's
a gateway, yes, but actually, I've never heard "Gateway"
used in the context I'm thinking about. It's clearly a
bridge, but I think a bridge might be just a subset of
a router. I suppose when I start putting Shares, then
it'll graduate to "Server," right?

And if anybody has a handy pointer to stuff like what
packets look like when coming and going through IP
masquerading. I've read dribs and drabs about public
nameservers out there; I get the impression that they're
able to point a domain name at a dynamic IP. Is this
accurate? If so, then I'll know it's possible. I have
a couple of web pages here and there - one of which
even has a cgi-bin. Hmmmmm. (I'm also a programmer,
you see. :-) )

See? I can toppost and bottompost simultaneously!

Cheers!
Rich

[0] I know, I know. This is really a pure networking Q, and
who in hell do I think I am crossposting an off-topic
question to the inner sanctum of the Geeks' Geeks, but
I'm a Slacker and I'm proud of it, and I'm gonna keep
cross-posting OT crap like my ramblings, and top posting,
and give the most level-headed, reasoned responses to
my flamers that I hope one day to reach the level of
a certain few like-minded folks.

Oh, and I'll keep top-posting when it suits the matter
at hand.

I wonder what's going to happen when I start interspersing?

[1] I haven't looked for answers on the samba config yet,
but will be tonight. I like errors that actually impart
some information. :-)

dhcpd made itself really easy to install. I took a
quick look at the HOWTO, (which I think I might write
a supplement to - unless somebody says that it's already
been done, better; I haven't looked for that yet either.)
and after minimal poking around, I just ran it and it
told me what I had to do. I just obeyed the error
messages, and on about the third try I'm up!

Rich

In alt.os.linux.slackware, Rich Grise dared to utter,
> So, what's this called? Is Thunderbird a Router? It's
> a gateway, yes, but actually, I've never heard "Gateway"
> used in the context I'm thinking about. It's clearly a
> bridge, but I think a bridge might be just a subset of
> a router. I suppose when I start putting Shares, then
> it'll graduate to "Server," right?

Why don't you google it? Let me give you a hint, you're way way way
way... just a few more way way wrong on considering it a bridge. Look,
just google for networking definitions and I'm sure you'll find it.
Moreoever, whatever you do find, read, because if you're going to be
doing networking you've got a lot left to learn.

> And if anybody has a handy pointer to stuff like what
> packets look like when coming and going through IP
> masquerading.

They look like any other datagram.

> I've read dribs and drabs about public
> nameservers out there; I get the impression that they're
> able to point a domain name at a dynamic IP. Is this
> accurate?

Again, google is your friend. Try searching for "define: nameserver".

> See? I can toppost and bottompost simultaneously!
>
> Oh, and I'll keep top-posting when it suits the matter
> at hand.

So the point of this whole little affair was to start a new thread
declaring that it's ok for you to break the conventions here, and that
you will continue to do so on a regular basis. Allow me to be the first
please.

*plonk*

--
It is better to hear the rebuke of the wise,
Than for a man to hear the song of fools.
Ecclesiastes 7:5

Oh no! Plonked by the sniveller Alan Hicks!

Alan Hicks <1001298936@carrier.lizella.net> wrote:
> In alt.os.linux.slackware, Rich Grise dared to utter,
> > So, what's this called? Is Thunderbird a Router? It's
> > a gateway, yes, but actually, I've never heard "Gateway"
> > used in the context I'm thinking about. It's clearly a
> > bridge, but I think a bridge might be just a subset of
> > a router. I suppose when I start putting Shares, then
> > it'll graduate to "Server," right?

> Why don't you google it? Let me give you a hint, you're way way way
> way... just a few more way way wrong on considering it a bridge. Look,
> just google for networking definitions and I'm sure you'll find it.
> Moreoever, whatever you do find, read, because if you're going to be
> doing networking you've got a lot left to learn.

> > And if anybody has a handy pointer to stuff like what
> > packets look like when coming and going through IP
> > masquerading.

> They look like any other datagram.

> > I've read dribs and drabs about public
> > nameservers out there; I get the impression that they're
> > able to point a domain name at a dynamic IP. Is this
> > accurate?

> Again, google is your friend. Try searching for "define: nameserver".

> > See? I can toppost and bottompost simultaneously!
> >
> > Oh, and I'll keep top-posting when it suits the matter
> > at hand.

> So the point of this whole little affair was to start a new thread
> declaring that it's ok for you to break the conventions here, and that
> you will continue to do so on a regular basis. Allow me to be the first
> please.

> *plonk*


--
Dan Szymborski <dan@baseballprimer.com> wrote in message
news:<MPG.1a67bc11b1c8f2cd989713@eagle.america.net >:
Pete Rose didn't free his soul, but Mark McGwire freely said that
it wasn't the steroids that unfaired reality. What we really need
is Pete Rose admitting that baseball takes Mark McGwire bat from
Babe Ruth but betting on baseball games is election of writers.
Steroid testing hits means that bats of steroids ban Rose but the
BBWAA tests for steroids at Balco and won't ban Bart Giamatti from
season.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 2004-02-20, Alan Hicks <1001298936@carrier.lizella.net> wrote:
> In alt.os.linux.slackware, Rich Grise dared to utter,
>
> So the point of this whole little affair was to start a new thread
> declaring that it's ok for you to break the conventions here, and that
> you will continue to do so on a regular basis. Allow me to be the first
> please.
>
> *plonk*

You're only the first to do a public plonking! ;-/

- --keith

- --
kkeller-usenet@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us
(try just my userid to email me)
AOLSFAQ=http://wombat.san-francisco.ca.us/cgi-bin/fom

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFANrnLhVcNCxZ5ID8RAm/tAJsFcEFpSi2OzcNAVY39NJA+ovnLvwCfSuYR
pP8BEEYdRsSNWQC4wpJkQus=
=vL2z
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

"Alan Hicks" <1001298936@carrier.lizella.net> wrote in message
news:slrnc3cu74.aoq.1001298936@carrier.lizella.net ...

> So the point of this whole little affair was to start a new thread
> declaring that it's ok for you to break the conventions here, and that
> you will continue to do so on a regular basis. Allow me to be the first
> please.
>


Actually, you're the first to have actually said "conventions." There's
something about the way that you said that, it's so much more logical
than "Don't Top Post, you brain-damaged nincompoop!" And that _wasn't_
the point of this whole little affair". The point of the post was to
see if have someone had information like:

"Moreoever, whatever you do find, read, because if you're going to be
doing networking you've got a lot left to learn."

and/or this:

"Again, google is your friend. Try searching for "define: nameserver".

For example, that's the first time I've seen a colon in a google search
string. I want to try it, and see if it behaves differently than a
search without a colon. The top-posting thing was just a footnote.

> *plonk*

Kinda sad, that the one guy who actually got through to me has cut
himself off from seeing the success of his superior presentation.
But, I've seen people overreact to various things before. I imagine
life will pretty much go on. :-)

Thanks!
Rich

Rich Grise wrote:
> So, what's this called? Is Thunderbird a Router?
Yes.

> It's clearly a bridge,
No, it's _not_ a bridge. Bridges work between segments of similar
networks and don't care about IP addressing.

> I suppose when I start putting Shares, then
> it'll graduate to "Server," right?
Yes.

--
Markku Kolkka
markku.kolkka@iki.fi

"Markku Kolkka" <markku.kolkka@iki.fi> wrote in message
news:c1adtj$fsc$1@phys-news1.kolumbus.fi...
> Rich Grise wrote:
> > So, what's this called? Is Thunderbird a Router?
> Yes.
>
> > It's clearly a bridge,
> No, it's _not_ a bridge. Bridges work between segments of similar
> networks and don't care about IP addressing.

I think I get what you're saying, but I'm going to try to draw
a diagram of what's in my head (well, a subset :-) ) ...
_____ _____
[Fred]-----| | | |----[Sue]
[Joe]------| Pat |----[bridge]----|Chris|----[Jane]
[Bill]-----|_____| |_____|----[Barbara]

but does this make any sense in any kind of context? Or is this
completely off-base? And does it make any difference? If we
replace "Pat" with "My ISP", what are the ramifications of
that? Then "bridge" doesn't even appear in the equation?

> > I suppose when I start putting Shares, then
> > it'll graduate to "Server," right?
> Yes.
> Markku Kolkka

Well, 2 out of 3 ain't bad ;-)

Thanks!
Rich