Greg Freemyer | 1 Feb 01:27 2006
Picon

Re: reviving the ALE NW meetings

On 1/31/06, Geoffrey <esoteric@...> wrote:
> So it appears we have a new location for the NW meetings.  It is very
> close to the I75-I285 interchange, off Interstate North Parkway.
>
> That being said, we're polling the list to find out who would attend,
> and what night is best for them.
>
> So, let us know.
>
> --
> Until later, Geoffrey

That is certainly more convenient for me than Emory or Kennesaw was.

I doubt if I come every month but any night Mon-Thur works for me.

Greg
--
Greg Freemyer
The Norcross Group
Forensics for the 21st Century
Greg Freemyer | 1 Feb 01:35 2006
Picon

Re: Putting wifi in the house

On 1/31/06, Sean Kilpatrick <drifter@...> wrote:
> On Tuesday 31 January 2006 12:16, James P. Kinney III wrote:
> | The FBI told me they were "too busy to concern themselves with this
> | unless there were financial damages above $10,000".
> |
> | So if a neighbor is surfing for kiddie porn on your wireless network,
> | the FBI won't do squat unless there is some serious $$ involved.
>
> That may well have been the case a few years back, say when Clinton
> was in the White House. With "W" in the WH the rules have changed. The
> FBI now seems more interested in chasing down porn peddlers and dope
> dealers than legit terrorists. They seem willing to leave _that_ task to
> the NSA. :(
>
> Sean

Actually I understand that the FBI now has anti-terrorism as its
primary focus.  porn and drugs have dropped in priority.  Obviously
the local police and GBI should still be interested.

Greg
--
Greg Freemyer
The Norcross Group
Forensics for the 21st Century
J. D. | 1 Feb 02:04 2006
Picon

Re: Putting wifi in the house

The
> FBI now seems more interested in chasing down porn peddlers and dope
> dealers than legit terrorists.

    Legit terrorists, now there are two words you don't see together very often... I'm sure I know what you meant but I just couldn't resist. ;)

J. D.
_______________________________________________
Ale mailing list
Ale@...
http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
hbbs | 1 Feb 02:38 2006
Picon
Picon

Re: Putting wifi in the house

Wresting the thread back on topic...

Do I understand that IPsec is not for the CPU-challenged?  Is a K7/700 w/128MB and no X over/underkill?

Jeff
 -------------- Original message ----------------------
From: "J. D." <jdonline@...>
>  The
> 
> > > FBI now seems more interested in chasing down porn peddlers and dope
> > > dealers than legit terrorists.
> 
> 
>     Legit terrorists, now there are two words you don't see together very
> often... I'm sure I know what you meant but I just couldn't resist. ;)
> 
> J. D.
> 

Picon
From: J. D. <jdonline@...>
Subject: Re: [ale] Putting wifi in the house
Date: 2006-02-01 01:04:51 GMT

The
> FBI now seems more interested in chasing down porn peddlers and dope
> dealers than legit terrorists.

    Legit terrorists, now there are two words you don't see together very often... I'm sure I know what you meant but I just couldn't resist. ;)

J. D.
_______________________________________________
Ale mailing list
Ale@...
http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
_______________________________________________
Ale mailing list
Ale@...
http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
Philip Polstra | 1 Feb 02:54 2006
Picon

Re: reviving the ALE NW meetings

I would try to attend.  Tuesdays and Thursdays are definitely out for me since I teach at KSU those nights.

I'd be willing to offer my flight school at the Cherokee County airport for a meeting place, but I suspect this wouldn't be as convienent as somewhere closer in.

On 1/31/06, Greg Freemyer <greg.freemyer-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
On 1/31/06, Geoffrey <esoteric <at> 3times25.net> wrote:
> So it appears we have a new location for the NW meetings.  It is very
> close to the I75-I285 interchange, off Interstate North Parkway.
>
> That being said, we're polling the list to find out who would attend,
> and what night is best for them.
>
> So, let us know.
>
> --
> Until later, Geoffrey

That is certainly more convenient for me than Emory or Kennesaw was.

I doubt if I come every month but any night Mon-Thur works for me.

Greg
--
Greg Freemyer
The Norcross Group
Forensics for the 21st Century
_______________________________________________
Ale mailing list
Ale-S6NtOCTnm14@public.gmane.org
http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale

_______________________________________________
Ale mailing list
Ale@...
http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
William Bagwell | 1 Feb 02:57 2006
Picon

Re: reviving the ALE NW meetings

On Tuesday 31 January 2006 07:27 pm, Greg Freemyer wrote:

> That is certainly more convenient for me than Emory or Kennesaw was.
>
> I doubt if I come every month but any night Mon-Thur works for me.

Slightly less convenient for me, but any night is fine and I will try to 
come as often as possible.
--

-- 
William
James P. Kinney III | 1 Feb 03:19 2006

Re: Putting wifi in the house

On Wed, 2006-02-01 at 01:38 +0000, hbbs@... wrote:
> Wresting the thread back on topic...
> 
> Do I understand that IPsec is not for the CPU-challenged?  Is a K7/700 w/128MB and no X over/underkill?
> 
> Jeff

Depends on the client load (assuming thats your proposed head end). Many
commercial Firewall system with VPN have substantially weaker cpu's and
can handle 10 simultaneous VPN clients.

Since you are looking at 2-3 laptops hitting that K7 for VPN traffic,
you _should_ have no trouble. 

Like ssh, IPSEC uses a PKI system to initiate a connection (very compute
intensive) then passes over a key for a 2-way cipher that can
encrypt/decrypt quickly and enforces frequent key changes. I know the
initial key exchange happens through the PKI transmission process. I'm
pretty sure the following key changes do as well. So even if someone
sniffs data and brute forces a key for a sequence of packets, they can't
get the key for the next sequence from that brute force event.

--

-- 
James P. Kinney III          \Changing the mobile computing world/
CEO & Director of Engineering \          one Linux user         /
Local Net Solutions,LLC        \           at a time.          /
770-493-8244                    \.___________________________./
http://www.localnetsolutions.com

GPG ID: 829C6CA7 James P. Kinney III (M.S. Physics)
<jkinney@...>
Fingerprint = 3C9E 6366 54FC A3FE BA4D 0659 6190 ADC3 829C 6CA7
_______________________________________________
Ale mailing list
Ale@...
http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
Richard Kolkovich | 1 Feb 04:10 2006

Re: reviving the ALE NW meetings

On Tue, 31 Jan 2006 16:36:26 -0500
Geoffrey <esoteric@...> wrote:

> So it appears we have a new location for the NW meetings.  It is very 
> close to the I75-I285 interchange, off Interstate North Parkway.
> 
> That being said, we're polling the list to find out who would attend, 
> and what night is best for them.
> 
> So, let us know.
> 

This is great for me, as I attend Southern Polytechnic and have class
until 7:15 on Thursdays.  I was balancing skipping early or missing out
on a few minutes of the meetings now that I am going to start
participating...this is much better.

--

-- 

Richard Kolkovich
sarumont@...
Raylynn Knight | 1 Feb 04:31 2006
Picon

Re: reviving the ALE NW meetings

On Tue, 2006-01-31 at 16:36 -0500, Geoffrey wrote:
> So it appears we have a new location for the NW meetings.  It is very 
> close to the I75-I285 interchange, off Interstate North Parkway.
> 
> That being said, we're polling the list to find out who would attend, 
> and what night is best for them.
> 
> So, let us know.
> 
Recall that the Central meeting (when it was the only one) was located
at Home Depot HQ for a while (1 exit West of the new NW location?).  

I could make meetings in that area almost any week-night as long as they
started at 7:00 PM or after.  Traffic in that area would make an earlier
arrival difficult.  I'd also be willing to do presentations.

Ray Knight
Ryan Fish | 1 Feb 04:45 2006
Picon

Re: TCP/IP routing on RHEL3 ES

There are no gateways specified in the ifcfg-ethX files so there shouldn’t be any confusion on that part.

 

I’m not sure why just restarting the network service isn’t accepting the changes and going about its business as I believe it should but I had to do the following:

 

1) route del default gw 192.168.3.1 (I had added this manually)

2) set the gateway to 209.168.x.x in /etc/sysconfig/network

3) reboot

 

When the box came back up everything was how it should be and IP traffic was routed properly again.

 

Any ideas why the reboot was necessary to get this to work right???

 

Thank you.

-Ryan

 

From: Jerry Yu [mailto:jjj863-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org]
Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2006 2:54 PM
To: FishR-Bdlq13kUjeyLZ21kGMrzwg@public.gmane.org; Atlanta Linux Enthusiasts
Subject: Re: [ale] TCP/IP routing on RHEL3 ES

 

you may want to check ifcfg-eth? to see whether they have GATEWAY= specified. I've seen 'network' init script got confused (from where I stand) about which gw to use as default route, when GATEWAY= is speficied in multiple ifcfg-eth? files.

On 1/31/06, Ryan Fish <FishR-Bdlq13kUjeyLZ21kGMrzwg@public.gmane.org> wrote:

I recently had to move a public IP address from one web server to another in the same farm.  Upon doing this I have experienced routing issues that I've been able to "fix" by manually adding the correct default gateways on each box.  However, these entries will not remain in place after a reboot (as per normal) but I am unable to get traffic to route properly on either box if I add the proper gateway information to /etc/sysconfig/network.

Box A

Now only on 192.168.3.X network, Class C, GW 192.168.3.1

Formerly on 209.168.X.X network, Class C, GW 209.168.X.X

Without using "route add default gw 192.168.3.1 eth0" no GW is shown in the routing table however the traffic does appear to route properly.  Why?

Unfortunately I have lost access to this box at this time as I made a change (set GW to 192.168.3.1 in /etc/sysconfig/network) and restarted the network (service network restart).  I will have to head out to the DC to change things back soon…

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Box B

192.168.3.X network, Class C

Now also has 209.168.X.X, Class C, GW 209.168.X.X

 I had to manually to do the following to get this box to route right after moving the public IP to it:

 ip route del default via 192.168.3.1 dev eth0

route add default gw 209.168.X.X eth1

 /etc/sysconfig/network still shows 192.168.3.1 as the gateway

 What am I missing and/or doing wrong here?  I've re-IP'd these boxes before without this type of trouble…  My online searches haven't come up with much useful info either.

 Hopefully what I just typed above makes some sort of sense.

 Thank you in advance!

 -Ryan

 

_______________________________________________
Ale mailing list
Ale@...
http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale

Gmane