|
hooah posted:No, that's from the Ethernet. MAC address is 20:CF:30:27:BA:17. So this is from a different computer connected via ethernet (to a switch or the back of the router or something) and the laptop is connected via wireless with a wireless MAC of 20:CF:.. ? Longinus00 fucked around with this message at 00:11 on Sep 15, 2013 |
#
?
Sep 15, 2013 00:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 15:00 |
|
|
Longinus00 posted:So this is from a different computer connected via ethernet (to a switch or the back of the router or something) and the laptop is connected via wireless with a wireless MAC of 20:CF:.. ? The dump was created on the laptop while connected via Ethernet. The MAC I gave you was the wired MAC. Wireless is 74:F0:6D:49:7C:8E.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2013 00:13
|
|
|
hooah posted:The dump was created on the laptop while connected via Ethernet. The MAC I gave you was the wired MAC. Wireless is 74:F0:6D:49:7C:8E. But you said the browsing the internet over ethernet works right? That would imply there's nothing wrong with your router. You should be capturing the wireless packets.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2013 00:17
|
|
|
Longinus00 posted:But you said the browsing the internet over ethernet works right? That would imply there's nothing wrong with your router. You should be capturing the wireless packets. Ok, so as I asked, how do I do that? I don't know what my wifi interface is called. I also don't know if I need to do the equivalent of unplugging the laptop for 30 seconds (turn off the wifi?) before starting the dump.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2013 00:19
|
|
|
hooah posted:Ok, so as I asked, how do I do that? I don't know what my wifi interface is called. I also don't know if I need to do the equivalent of unplugging the laptop for 30 seconds (turn off the wifi?) before starting the dump. All the interfaces will be listed via ip link or if that doesn't work iwconfig. It should be called something like wlan0. To be on the safe side you can turn it off and on.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2013 00:23
|
|
|
Longinus00 posted:Let's pimp cloudshark for a second. Cloudshark... thank you for this. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2013 00:27
|
|
|
Alright, here's the dump: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/3105927/tcpdump.dmp
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2013 00:27
|
|
|
hooah posted:Alright, here's the dump: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/3105927/tcpdump.dmp http://cloudshark.org/captures/7b8e0c635175 Your router and your laptop are able to talk to each other fine. code:
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2013 00:59
|
|
|
Longinus00 posted:http://cloudshark.org/captures/7b8e0c635175 Ok, so where should I look next?
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2013 01:11
|
|
|
Anyone?
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2013 13:54
|
|
|
The router handed back a DHCP request with options for gateway (192.168.1.1) DNS servers (192.168.1.1) and netmask (255.255.255.0). Does your interface take those results? ("ip link" should show the address and netmask, /etc/resolv.conf should show the DNS servers, route -n should show the gateway)
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2013 16:40
|
|
|
Ok, ip link just gives me " mtu 1500 qdisc mq state UP mode DORMANT qlen 1000 link/ether 74:f0:... brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff" for the wlan interface. The conf file does say the nameserver is at 192.168.1.1, and the route command givescode:
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2013 18:38
|
|
|
hooah posted:Ok, ip link just gives me " mtu 1500 qdisc mq state UP mode DORMANT qlen 1000 link/ether 74:f0:... brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff" for the wlan interface. The conf file does say the nameserver is at 192.168.1.1, and the route command gives This means "0.0.0.0" means "any destination" and the "g" flag means gateway. This also means your default route is set. Sorry, I meant "ip addr" for wlan0. What's the name of the laptop? Can you get a dump with "ping -c 192.168.1.1"?
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2013 18:58
|
|
|
evol262 posted:This means "0.0.0.0" means "any destination" and the "g" flag means gateway. This also means your default route is set. Alright, here you go. I left ping running for ~30 seconds since debian apparently doesn't do the -c switch, but it keeps running by itself.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2013 20:36
|
|
|
hooah posted:Alright, here you go. I left ping running for ~30 seconds since debian apparently doesn't do the -c switch, but it keeps running by itself. No that's just standard behaviour of ping on any distro, windows is the exception.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2013 20:40
|
|
|
hooah posted:Alright, here you go. I left ping running for ~30 seconds since debian apparently doesn't do the -c switch, but it keeps running by itself. http://cloudshark.org/captures/938b4a08cb1b There is no ICMP traffic in that capture. Was ping working for those 30 seconds?
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2013 20:42
|
|
|
spankmeister posted:No that's just standard behaviour of ping on any distro, windows is the exception. I'd thought so, but was confused that he included that switch.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2013 20:43
|
|
|
ping -c needs an argument. ping -c 192.168.1.1 is meaningless and was probably a typo. Usage: ping [-LRUbdfnqrvVaAD] [-c count] ...
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2013 20:47
|
|
|
Longinus00 posted:http://cloudshark.org/captures/938b4a08cb1b It was unsuccessful, from 192.168.1.9 (what? I checked, and ip addr still says 192.168.1.2), destination host unreachable.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2013 20:55
|
|
|
hooah posted:It was unsuccessful, from 192.168.1.9 (what? I checked, and ip addr still says 192.168.1.2), destination host unreachable. Yes, I meant "-c 3 192.168.1.1". Typo. "ip addr | grep 192.168.1.9" Did you assign 192.168.1.9 to ethernet manually? Do you have another interface bound to 192.168.1.9? "From 192.168.1.9..." means that address is assigned somewhere on your laptop. Can you post the output of "ip addr"?
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2013 21:06
|
|
|
hooah posted:It was unsuccessful, from 192.168.1.9 (what? I checked, and ip addr still says 192.168.1.2), destination host unreachable. Are you connected via ethernet and wireless at the same time? Can you download an ubuntu/fedora/whatever live cd and see if you have internet if you boot off of that? Longinus00 fucked around with this message at 21:10 on Sep 16, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2013 21:08
|
|
|
evol262 posted:Yes, I meant "-c 3 192.168.1.1". Typo. I don't recall setting the .9 address manually; if I had, I would think I'd do something further from the addresses that already exist on my home network. Here's a pastebin with the output of ip addr. It seems that eth0 does indeed have an IP address of 192.168.1.9 (and a secondary of .10). Longinus00 posted:Are you connected via ethernet and wireless at the same time? No, I'm not connected to both simultaneously. I'm currently downloading Ubuntu to throw on a USB stick to see if it gets wireless.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2013 21:31
|
|
|
hooah posted:I don't recall setting the .9 address manually; if I had, I would think I'd do something further from the addresses that already exist on my home network. Here's a pastebin with the output of ip addr. It seems that eth0 does indeed have an IP address of 192.168.1.9 (and a secondary of .10). Your pastebin indicates you are connected to both. Do you ifdown the appropriate interface when testing the other?
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2013 21:45
|
|
|
Salt Fish posted:Your pastebin indicates you are connected to both. Do you ifdown the appropriate interface when testing the other? No, I just unplugged the cord. I just did "ifdown eth0" (assuming that's the proper use; never heard of that command before), and it output code:
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2013 21:49
|
|
|
hooah posted:No, I just unplugged the cord. I just did "ifdown eth0" (assuming that's the proper use; never heard of that command before), and it output Kindly report on if the issue is resolved and reply to me with the same. Salt Fish fucked around with this message at 21:59 on Sep 16, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2013 21:57
|
|
|
hooah posted:No, I just unplugged the cord. I just did "ifdown eth0" (assuming that's the proper use; never heard of that command before), and it output I noticed in your ip addr output eth0 is actually associated with two different ip addresses which is an unusual setting for a laptop. code:
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2013 22:01
|
|
|
I'm new to linux, and trying to install Ubuntu 13.04 on an Acer V5 laptop is proving difficult. I've heard linux doesn't play nicely with ATI cards, and that would appear to be correct because when I try to start lightdm the screen just goes black and stays black, which I assumed meant I didn't have the correct drivers. I installed the latest AMD drivers but got a message about no supported adapters when I ran aticonfig. Any help on where to look next?
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2013 22:02
|
|
|
Salt Fish posted:I don't know whats going on because I've been glossing over most of the discussion about this issue. I see in the pastebin that the eth0 interface was actually down so I was basically guessing. ifup and ifdown toggle and interface state from up to down. In RH I would use this command to push changes made to the network-scripts/. I don't know anything about any other distro. Report where? Here? Yes, everything's fine now. I have a separate question. I downloaded and installed Chrome, but it doesn't show up in the applications menu. I can find a shortcut in /usr/bin, which points to /opt/google/chrome/google-chrome. How do I get it to show up in an easier-to-access location?
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2013 22:03
|
|
|
hooah posted:Report where? Here? Yes, everything's fine now. Debian uses the "Gnome" Window manager. You'll want to google "how to add application to gnome application launcher".
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2013 22:07
|
|
|
NtotheTC posted:I'm new to linux, and trying to install Ubuntu 13.04 on an Acer V5 laptop is proving difficult. I've heard linux doesn't play nicely with ATI cards, and that would appear to be correct because when I try to start lightdm the screen just goes black and stays black, which I assumed meant I didn't have the correct drivers. I installed the latest AMD drivers but got a message about no supported adapters when I ran aticonfig. Any help on where to look next? Just do an lspci for us from the command line. Probably is a Radeon but it's still not using the propriety driver and the cards too new for the open source one. When it boots and fails when starting the window manager just Alt+F2 and log into the machine from the command line. Not sure which driver you installed but try this latest beta driver which supposedly supports the very latest laptop cards, including one of the Radeon's in the V5. code:
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2013 09:39
|
|
|
Thanks, those steps worked. For the record it was a Radeon HD 8280.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2013 11:11
|
|
|
Suspicious Dish is it true that RHEL 6.5 will get OpenSSL 1.0.1? I'd really like to start supporting TLSv1.1 and 1.2 without having to roll my own OpenSSL. (Or waiting for 7).
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2013 18:18
|
|
|
spankmeister posted:Suspicious Dish is it true that RHEL 6.5 will get OpenSSL 1.0.1? Asking for potentially private information: bad. Dish isn't the only RH employee on SA. But from a Summit keynote (and thus, public). RH Summit Presentation posted:Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6.5 You can also find some informative Bugzillas. evol262 fucked around with this message at 18:54 on Sep 17, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2013 18:52
|
|
|
To be honest, spankmeister, I have no idea where to even begin to find information about what random library we're going to ship in a minor update of RHEL6 internally, and whether some of this is public or not. Our intranet is extremely disorganized and out of date (we seem to migrate to a new system every year), and evol262 is probably more aware of things like this than me. I also forgot my OTP token at home today, and the new wiki system seems to require it, even when plugged into an ethernet jack.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2013 21:02
|
|
|
Who knows bind? Will a slave server return a SERVFAIL if it can't complete a zone transfer?
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2013 21:16
|
|
|
Oh forgive my naivete. I forgot the usual "dont give out any info that's not public" disclaimer. And I also forgot you worked there evol, apologies... Thanks for the info, this makes me happy. Openssl isn't some random library really so this update will be a very positive thing! It means a LOT of web servers on the internet will start supporting TLSv1.2. Now if the browsers will catch up we can finally drop loving RC4.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2013 21:17
|
|
|
Suspicious Dish posted:Our intranet is extremely disorganized and out of date (we seem to migrate to a new system every year), and evol262 is probably more aware of things like this than me. You must be the only person in the company without a software token. spankmeister posted:Oh forgive my naivete. spankmeister posted:Thanks for the info, this makes me happy. Openssl isn't some random library really so this update will be a very positive thing! It means a LOT of web servers on the internet will start supporting TLSv1.2. Now if the browsers will catch up we can finally drop loving RC4. fivre posted:Who knows bind? Will a slave server return a SERVFAIL if it can't complete a zone transfer?
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2013 21:40
|
|
|
"evol262" posted:No need to apologize for it at all. I haven't been here that long, and I got the information via Google like everyone else... Very little of what I do internally has any bearing on answers in this thread. Yeah I lost count of the times I've installed opens098e on 6 or opens097d (i think it was d, not sure) on 5 etc... I don't use unofficial repos other than epel and rpmforge usually so rather than getting some unknown rpm for such an important lib I decided to roll my own using the FC20 SRPM. This works fine but I don't really feel like maintainig it for myself.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2013 21:53
|
|
|
My team is mulling over setting up its own internal open-source Certificate Authority instead of getting ours sourced from the corporate mothership all the time. The only requirement is that it's open source since this isn't a funded project, but it'd be nice to have something simple and easy to use, preferably with some manner of web GUI so that our NOC can renew/sign/revoke certificates during off-hours. Anyone have any recommendations? I've looked at Dogtag and TinyCA but I'm sure there's way more out there than I'm aware of.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2013 22:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 15:00 |
|
|
OK, spankmeister, I talked to a bunch of coworkers for the last few hours and they set me up with access to the internal systems for RHEL management, so I know now what RHEL6.5 is being composed of, and I have access to nightlies. I also found our wiki page for what components are approved to be upgraded, and they've assured me that this is public information, so if you have any more questions, I can actually answer them. While I can't give schedule information on when RHEL6.5 is going into beta or general availability, we do have internal target dates, and you can subscribe to rhelv6-announce to know when something is being made public. https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhelv6-announce As you can see from the archives, it's an extremely low-volume, not-spammy-at-all mailing list, and there's a beta annoucement about 6.4 from last year: https://www.redhat.com/archives/rhelv6-announce/2012-December/msg00000.html So you will get some news at some point.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2013 22:44
|
|