Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.debian.user > #171186 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-08-17 16:50 +0200 |
| Last post | 2016-08-18 23:20 +0200 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 83 — 21 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user
A minimalist network Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-08-17 16:50 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Darac Marjal <mailinglist@darac.org.uk> - 2016-08-17 17:20 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Miles Fidelman <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net> - 2016-08-17 17:40 +0200
Re: A minimalist network David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2016-08-17 19:00 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-08-17 23:20 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Miles Fidelman <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net> - 2016-08-17 23:50 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-08-18 00:10 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Miles Fidelman <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net> - 2016-08-18 00:40 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-08-18 01:20 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@debian.org> - 2016-08-18 01:50 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-08-19 14:00 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2016-08-19 18:40 +0200
Re: A minimalist network David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2016-08-18 03:30 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Jonathan Dowland <jmtd@debian.org> - 2016-08-19 10:20 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-08-17 23:10 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-08-17 23:20 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-08-18 00:40 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Miles Fidelman <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net> - 2016-08-18 00:40 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Miles Fidelman <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net> - 2016-08-17 23:20 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-08-18 00:30 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> - 2016-08-18 00:50 +0200
Re: A minimalist network David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2016-08-18 03:30 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Miles Fidelman <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net> - 2016-08-18 04:00 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-08-18 14:20 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2016-08-18 12:40 +0200
Re: A minimalist network David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2016-08-18 22:10 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-08-19 14:10 +0200
Re: A minimalist network rhkramer@gmail.com - 2016-08-17 23:40 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Miles Fidelman <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net> - 2016-08-17 23:50 +0200
Re: A minimalist network rhkramer@gmail.com - 2016-08-18 01:30 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-08-18 00:50 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@debian.org> - 2016-08-18 01:30 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Pascal Hambourg <pascal@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2016-08-18 13:00 +0200
Re: A minimalist network David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2016-08-18 19:10 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Reco <recoverym4n@gmail.com> - 2016-08-18 19:20 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-08-18 19:40 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Pascal Hambourg <pascal@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2016-08-18 20:00 +0200
Re: A minimalist network "der.hans" <deb-user@LuftHans.com> - 2016-08-17 17:20 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-08-17 22:50 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-08-17 23:30 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-08-18 14:10 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-08-18 16:50 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-08-19 14:00 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-08-17 23:40 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-08-18 00:50 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-08-18 01:10 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Miles Fidelman <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net> - 2016-08-18 01:40 +0200
Re: A minimalist network David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2016-08-18 03:10 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-08-18 16:00 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-08-18 16:10 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-08-19 14:50 +0200
Re: A minimalist network <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-08-19 15:10 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-08-19 15:50 +0200
Re: A minimalist network David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2016-08-19 19:50 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-08-19 16:00 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-08-19 16:00 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-08-19 17:00 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-08-19 19:40 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-08-19 21:20 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Mike McClain <mike.junk@copper.net> - 2016-08-20 08:40 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-08-20 13:30 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2016-08-20 22:00 +0200
Re: A minimalist network rhkramer@gmail.com - 2016-08-18 17:10 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@debian.org> - 2016-08-18 17:30 +0200
RE: A minimalist network Bonno Bloksma <b.bloksma@tio.nl> - 2016-08-19 12:20 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-08-18 17:40 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Tim McDonough <tmcdonough@gmail.com> - 2016-08-18 17:50 +0200
Re: A minimalist network David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2016-08-18 18:10 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2016-08-18 19:00 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-08-18 17:40 +0200
Re: A minimalist network David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2016-08-18 21:00 +0200
Re: A minimalist network David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2016-08-18 21:30 +0200
Re: A minimalist network David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2016-08-18 21:40 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Charlie Kravetz <cjk@teamcharliesangels.com> - 2016-08-18 22:40 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-08-18 23:20 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-08-19 15:00 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-08-19 16:00 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-08-19 16:10 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-08-19 16:50 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-08-19 20:00 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Miles Fidelman <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net> - 2016-08-19 17:50 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-08-19 20:10 +0200
Re: A minimalist network Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-08-18 23:20 +0200
Page 4 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 Next page →
| From | Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-20 13:30 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <s8cDn-2h7-7@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #171332 |
On 8/19/2016 7:42 PM, Mike McClain wrote:
> Don't know if this will help but...
It will. Perhaps not in the way you would expect. Early in this
thread I asked "What questions should I be asking?" Your post
provides guidelines to creating for myself those questions. I
hope that makes sense.
> I have a 2 box network, Wheezy and Win2K, cable connected and able to
> access directories on the Win2K box from Debian.
I have a set of Wheezy DVD's so I can avoid one possible source
of ambiguity.
> Never needed to go the other way.
I don't see that I currently have a need to go the other way.
> The Linux box is named playground, the Win2K box South40.
> There is a router between them but it's not necessary (belt&suspenders).
Pedagogically I'd prefer {belt OR suspenders} to {belt AND
suspenders}.
>[snip details of set up]
Thank you.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-20 22:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <s8kAV-7kG-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #171300 |
Hi Richard, On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 07:41:56AM -0500, Richard Owlett wrote: > As I had said in last paragraph of > https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2016/08/msg00609.html : > "Why would I be interested in ssh as both machines are sitting on my > desk and _neither_ will be connected to the internet when ethernet > connection is live?" If you ever have a need to administer the Linux machine while not being in front of it then you will probably find this easiest over ssh. Yes, you could argue that you do not need the encryption features of ssh since the data only goes over this short cable inside your home, but really, ssh is so ubiquitous that it's probably not worth using any different solution. If remote (and remote may include things like, over wifi from another room in your house) administration is never going to be something you do, as you'll be doing all work from the physical keyboard of the machine, then maybe ssh is something you don't need to run. Running ssh also allows file transfer with scp or sftp. >From what I can tell you haven't actually got IP connectivity going yet though, so perhaps talk of ssh is premature. Perhaps get networking working before you consider which networking applications you're going to install. Cheers, Andy -- http://bitfolk.com/ -- No-nonsense VPS hosting "The electric guitar - like making love - is much improved by a little feedback, completely ruined by too much." — The League Against Tedium
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rhkramer@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-18 17:10 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <s7x7b-1sK-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #171245 |
On Thursday, August 18, 2016 09:58:23 AM Richard Owlett wrote: > On 8/17/2016 8:07 PM, David Christensen wrote: > > On 08/17/2016 07:45 AM, Richard Owlett wrote: > > 6. Distances between devices. ... > 6. < 1 ft. Because I learned one thing here already (Gigabit ethernet usually doesn't require crossover cables), I'll see if I can learn something else ;-) Back in the "good ole days" there used to be a minimum segment / cable length for an Ethernet cable--I don't recall to what all it applied--i.e., I don't recall if it applied to thick Ethernet, thin (coax) Ethernet, Cat 5 and Cat 6, all of the above or just some of the above. I always used a minimum of 6' and that worked for me. Does that apply for Gigabit Ethernet?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@debian.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-18 17:30 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <s7xqx-1Ax-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #171250 |
On Thu, 18 Aug 2016, rhkramer@gmail.com wrote: > Back in the "good ole days" there used to be a minimum segment / cable length > for an Ethernet cable--I don't recall to what all it applied--i.e., I don't > recall if it applied to thick Ethernet, thin (coax) Ethernet, Cat 5 and Cat 6, > all of the above or just some of the above. I always used a minimum of 6' and > that worked for me. > > Does that apply for Gigabit Ethernet? Sort of, but not directly. Ethernet and fast-ethernet have minimum cable lengths specified. There is no minimum cable length specified for gigabit ethernet (1000BASE-T). For gigabit ethernet, what matters is that none of the crosstalk parameters are exceeded. So, any length of cable *as long as it certifies as CAT5e/6/6A* will work for gigabit ethernet. In practice, you'll find good CAT6 1m patch cables readly available, I've never seen anyone bother selling anything shorter than that, but YMMV. -- Henrique Holschuh
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bonno Bloksma <b.bloksma@tio.nl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-19 12:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <s7P46-4jX-13@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #171251 |
Hi, >> Back in the "good ole days" there used to be a minimum segment / cable >> length for an Ethernet cable--I don't recall to what all it >> applied--i.e., I don't recall if it applied to thick Ethernet, thin [...] >> Does that apply for Gigabit Ethernet? > > Sort of, but not directly. > > Ethernet and fast-ethernet have minimum cable lengths specified. There > is no minimum cable length specified for gigabit ethernet (1000BASE-T). > > For gigabit ethernet, what matters is that none of the crosstalk parameters > are exceeded. So, any length of cable *as long as it certifies as CAT5e/6/6A* > will work for gigabit ethernet. > > In practice, you'll find good CAT6 1m patch cables readly available, I've > never seen anyone bother selling anything shorter than that, but YMMV. For switch to switch connections I use Cat6 0,5m cables a lot, that is just under 2ft. Bonno Bloksma
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-18 17:40 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <s7xAe-1DK-15@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #171250 |
On Thursday 18 August 2016 16:07:28 rhkramer@gmail.com wrote: > Back in the "good ole days" there used to be a minimum segment / cable > length for an Ethernet cable--I don't recall to what all it applied--i.e., > I don't recall if it applied to thick Ethernet, thin (coax) Ethernet, Cat 5 > and Cat 6, all of the above or just some of the above. I always used a > minimum of 6' and that worked for me. I have frequently used shorter ones. I think that the shortest I have ever actually used was 30 cm. (12") (Cat 5 and Cat 5e.) So far I have never had occasion to use a short Cat6 patch cable. Lisi
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tim McDonough <tmcdonough@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-18 17:50 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <s7xJT-1GE-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #171250 |
On 8/18/2016 10:07 AM, rhkramer@gmail.com wrote: > Because I learned one thing here already (Gigabit ethernet usually > doesn't > require crossover cables), I'll see if I can learn something else ;-) > > Back in the "good ole days" there used to be a minimum segment / cable length > for an Ethernet cable--I don't recall to what all it applied--i.e., I don't > recall if it applied to thick Ethernet, thin (coax) Ethernet, Cat 5 and Cat 6, > all of the above or just some of the above. I always used a minimum of 6' and > that worked for me. > > Does that apply for Gigabit Ethernet? I believe that only applied to the older 10Base2 (thinnet) type networks that used coaxial cables instead of twisted pair wiring. I do not recall the minimum length either. Tim
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-18 18:10 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <s7y3g-21U-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #171250 |
On Thu 18 Aug 2016 at 11:07:28 (-0400), rhkramer@gmail.com wrote: > On Thursday, August 18, 2016 09:58:23 AM Richard Owlett wrote: > > On 8/17/2016 8:07 PM, David Christensen wrote: > > > On 08/17/2016 07:45 AM, Richard Owlett wrote: > > > > 6. Distances between devices. > > ... > > > 6. < 1 ft. > > Because I learned one thing here already (Gigabit ethernet usually doesn't > require crossover cables), I'll see if I can learn something else ;-) > > Back in the "good ole days" there used to be a minimum segment / cable length > for an Ethernet cable--I don't recall to what all it applied--i.e., I don't > recall if it applied to thick Ethernet, thin (coax) Ethernet, Cat 5 and Cat 6, > all of the above or just some of the above. I always used a minimum of 6' and > that worked for me. > > Does that apply for Gigabit Ethernet? 6 feet is sensible. This may be why modems and routers come with 6-foot cables, the cheapest guaranteed to work. Shorter could give problems with cheap devices. But there's no harm in the devices themselves being closer, eg stacked, as long as the ventilation works and you don't have our sort of weather (often >100°F outside). In days of yore, there was a minimum distance on coax because every transmission was effectively a broadcast, and had to pass a certain distance (≡time) before any reply would be recognised *as a reply* rather than the transmitter hearing itself transmitting. And if you had a problem, everyone on that segment would share it too. They say half a metre, but we were not allowed anything less than one metre. And 50Ω, not 75Ω TV cable! Cheers, David.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Joe <joe@jretrading.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-18 19:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <s7yPE-2jp-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #171257 |
On Thu, 18 Aug 2016 11:04:16 -0500 David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> wrote: > > In days of yore, there was a minimum distance on coax because > every transmission was effectively a broadcast, and had to pass a > certain distance (≡time) before any reply would be recognised *as a > reply* rather than the transmitter hearing itself transmitting. I doubt that was it. A metre of coax will have a delay of 10-20ns, which was the blink of an eye to hardware of that era. Collisions would have been detected by abnormal levels, which is why termination of the cable was such a big deal. Coax-based Ethernet was basically analogue video technology. Except for, as you say, the damn' stupid 50 Ohms... -- Joe
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-18 17:40 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <s7xAe-1DK-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #171245 |
On Thursday 18 August 2016 14:58:23 Richard Owlett wrote: > On 8/17/2016 8:07 PM, David Christensen wrote: > > On 08/17/2016 07:45 AM, Richard Owlett wrote: > >> I wish to connect two laptops via Ethernet. > >> > >> The Debian machine is having various configurations of Jessie installed. > >> Consider it a laboratory experiment. It can have multiple installs in a > >> day. It intentionally has *NO* internet connectivity. It has a small > >> partition set aside for preseed.cfg and miscellaneous scripts. > >> > >> The second machine is running WinXP Pro SP3 and serves as source of > >> preseed and script files. > >> > >> My internet searches turn up too much outdated information and/or fine > >> detail. Most link assume a server with multiple clients. Better > >> description would be a peer to peer setup. It may be convenient to have > >> the Windows machine act as a terminal for the Debian machine. > > > > It would help if you provided more information about your network and > > computers: > > > > 1. Laptop make, model, and version, CPU make and model, RAM size, > > HDD/SSD size, and Ethernet speed of Windows laptop. > > > > 2. Experimental laptop and key parameters (as above). > > > > 3. Internet modem or gateway. > > > > 4. Router and/or routing software. > > > > 5. Any other devices we should know about. > > > > 6. Distances between devices. > > 1. ThinkPad T43 [https://support.lenovo.com/us/en/documents/pd012235] > 2. ThinkPad R61 [https://support.lenovo.com/us/en/documents/pd013965] > 3. N/A > 4. TBD > 5. none > 6. < 1 ft. Are you not on the Internet at all? I thought that your Windows computer did have a *limited* connection, at which rate you must have a modem of some kind, albeit possibly internal. Lisi
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-18 21:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <s7AHM-3sW-13@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #171245 |
On 08/18/2016 06:58 AM, Richard Owlett wrote: > On 8/17/2016 8:07 PM, David Christensen wrote: >> 3. Internet modem or gateway. > 3. N/A So, the laptops are not connected to the Internet? How do you access the Internet to post and read this list, download Debian ISO's, etc.? David
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-18 21:30 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <s7BaN-3Ud-19@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #171272 |
On Thu 18 Aug 2016 at 11:50:23 (-0700), David Christensen wrote: > On 08/18/2016 06:58 AM, Richard Owlett wrote: > > On 8/17/2016 8:07 PM, David Christensen wrote: > >> 3. Internet modem or gateway. > > 3. N/A > > So, the laptops are not connected to the Internet? How do you access > the Internet to post and read this list, download Debian ISO's, etc.? Keep up, there at the back! :) https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2015/09/msg00930.html Cheers, David.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-18 21:40 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <s7Bkt-3Yh-11@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #171272 |
On Thu 18 Aug 2016 at 11:50:23 (-0700), David Christensen wrote: > On 08/18/2016 06:58 AM, Richard Owlett wrote: > > On 8/17/2016 8:07 PM, David Christensen wrote: > >> 3. Internet modem or gateway. > > 3. N/A > > So, the laptops are not connected to the Internet? How do you access > the Internet to post and read this list, download Debian ISO's, etc.? and https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2015/06/msg00909.html Cheers, David.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charlie Kravetz <cjk@teamcharliesangels.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-18 22:40 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <s7Cgx-4y3-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #171272 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On Thu, 18 Aug 2016 11:50:23 -0700 David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> wrote: >On 08/18/2016 06:58 AM, Richard Owlett wrote: >> On 8/17/2016 8:07 PM, David Christensen wrote: >>> 3. Internet modem or gateway. >> 3. N/A > >So, the laptops are not connected to the Internet? How do you access >the Internet to post and read this list, download Debian ISO's, etc.? > > >David > Why do they have to be connected to the Internet? I have four computers here. Three are not connected, one is. - -- Charlie Kravetz Linux Registered User Number 425914 [http://linuxcounter.net/user/425914.html] Never let anyone steal your DREAM. [http://keepingdreams.com] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJXthCGAAoJEIqui46mydCASwEH/AnXd2OcG1fhIKOWPzxUDBUD L0jfoK46PbTv6WBeuD73rBIFikf08t+ynGcLkvg1cegmwa50eP/lx2bcc0lKGRNM K2c4nITsbVUQ/w9Gz72iwv5xUhR7KUFMlVQIbZR5V4UWV8GojYdHxD8JSCmd/xWK pI/5qtkRJwmEjSxw8+FKqjJQ2i/0EgHz5Q+I1YM4utCusqhXeBE9wA2uLiaLq1XE D7VzT/1cVWtjfm5oZ9g+8qUaHV3YoULgD0UTnAfILnC3Zk6SE9Dp9Wjzhd9++8Z+ 8GrccIviZkdZLNpT6Ug94nd5LlsJWZIlpdo8E4oOmgsmVjHkQmdfSVyNj6QA5ak= =OLf/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-18 23:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <s7CTf-4ZR-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #171281 |
On Thursday 18 August 2016 20:46:14 Charlie Kravetz wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA256 > > On Thu, 18 Aug 2016 11:50:23 -0700 > > David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> wrote: > >On 08/18/2016 06:58 AM, Richard Owlett wrote: > >> On 8/17/2016 8:07 PM, David Christensen wrote: > >>> 3. Internet modem or gateway. > >> > >> 3. N/A > > > >So, the laptops are not connected to the Internet? How do you access > >the Internet to post and read this list, download Debian ISO's, etc.? > > > > > >David > > Why do they have to be connected to the Internet? I have four computers > here. Three are not connected, one is. So one of Richard's two has to be connected. Lisi
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-19 15:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <s7RyV-5Jf-23@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #171282 |
On 8/18/2016 4:13 PM, Lisi Reisz wrote: > On Thursday 18 August 2016 20:46:14 Charlie Kravetz wrote: >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >> Hash: SHA256 >> >> On Thu, 18 Aug 2016 11:50:23 -0700 >> >> David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> wrote: >>> On 08/18/2016 06:58 AM, Richard Owlett wrote: >>>> On 8/17/2016 8:07 PM, David Christensen wrote: >>>>> 3. Internet modem or gateway. >>>> >>>> 3. N/A >>> >>> So, the laptops are not connected to the Internet? How do you access >>> the Internet to post and read this list, download Debian ISO's, etc.? >>> >>> >>> David >> >> Why do they have to be connected to the Internet? I have four computers >> here. Three are not connected, one is. > > So one of Richard's two has to be connected. > Not really ;) As I had said in last paragraph of https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2016/08/msg00609.html : "Why would I be interested in ssh as both machines are sitting on my desk and _neither_ will be connected to the internet when ethernet connection is live?" The sole purpose of the Ethernet connection is to avoid sneakernet when transferring small preseed.cfg and script files from the WinXP machine to my Debian experiment.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-19 16:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <s7Sv0-6kb-33@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #171301 |
On Friday 19 August 2016 13:55:39 Richard Owlett wrote: > On 8/18/2016 4:13 PM, Lisi Reisz wrote: > > On Thursday 18 August 2016 20:46:14 Charlie Kravetz wrote: > >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > >> Hash: SHA256 > >> > >> On Thu, 18 Aug 2016 11:50:23 -0700 > >> > >> David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> wrote: > >>> On 08/18/2016 06:58 AM, Richard Owlett wrote: > >>>> On 8/17/2016 8:07 PM, David Christensen wrote: > >>>>> 3. Internet modem or gateway. > >>>> > >>>> 3. N/A > >>> > >>> So, the laptops are not connected to the Internet? How do you access > >>> the Internet to post and read this list, download Debian ISO's, etc.? > >>> > >>> > >>> David > >> > >> Why do they have to be connected to the Internet? I have four computers > >> here. Three are not connected, one is. > > > > So one of Richard's two has to be connected. > > Not really ;) > As I had said in last paragraph of > https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2016/08/msg00609.html : > "Why would I be interested in ssh as both machines are sitting on > my desk and _neither_ will be connected to the internet when > ethernet connection is live?" > > The sole purpose of the Ethernet connection is to avoid > sneakernet when transferring small preseed.cfg and script files > from the WinXP machine to my Debian experiment. Correction - or rather, expansion to include what was clearly inferred. ;-) So one of Richard's two has to be connected., AT LEAST FOR SOME OF THE TIME. ;-) Lisi
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-19 16:10 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <s7SEF-6Cv-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #171307 |
On 8/19/2016 8:54 AM, Lisi Reisz wrote: > On Friday 19 August 2016 13:55:39 Richard Owlett wrote: >> On 8/18/2016 4:13 PM, Lisi Reisz wrote: >>> On Thursday 18 August 2016 20:46:14 Charlie Kravetz wrote: >>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >>>> Hash: SHA256 >>>> >>>> On Thu, 18 Aug 2016 11:50:23 -0700 >>>> >>>> David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> wrote: >>>>> On 08/18/2016 06:58 AM, Richard Owlett wrote: >>>>>> On 8/17/2016 8:07 PM, David Christensen wrote: >>>>>>> 3. Internet modem or gateway. >>>>>> >>>>>> 3. N/A >>>>> >>>>> So, the laptops are not connected to the Internet? How do you access >>>>> the Internet to post and read this list, download Debian ISO's, etc.? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> David >>>> >>>> Why do they have to be connected to the Internet? I have four computers >>>> here. Three are not connected, one is. >>> >>> So one of Richard's two has to be connected. >> >> Not really ;) >> As I had said in last paragraph of >> https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2016/08/msg00609.html : >> "Why would I be interested in ssh as both machines are sitting on >> my desk and _neither_ will be connected to the internet when >> ethernet connection is live?" >> >> The sole purpose of the Ethernet connection is to avoid >> sneakernet when transferring small preseed.cfg and script files >> from the WinXP machine to my Debian experiment. > > Correction - or rather, expansion to include what was clearly inferred. ;-) > > So one of Richard's two has to be connected., AT LEAST FOR SOME OF THE > TIME. ;-) > > Lisi > NO <GRIN> I physically have two other machines on my desk which I could serve nicely to connect to the internet. Connecting either of the T43 or R61 ha NEVER been considered ;) People keep presuming me to be normal and/or typical. Relatives gave up that idea eons ago.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-19 16:50 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <s7Thn-6Rs-31@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #171308 |
On Friday 19 August 2016 15:08:03 Richard Owlett wrote: > On 8/19/2016 8:54 AM, Lisi Reisz wrote: > > On Friday 19 August 2016 13:55:39 Richard Owlett wrote: > >> On 8/18/2016 4:13 PM, Lisi Reisz wrote: > >>> On Thursday 18 August 2016 20:46:14 Charlie Kravetz wrote: > >>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > >>>> Hash: SHA256 > >>>> > >>>> On Thu, 18 Aug 2016 11:50:23 -0700 > >>>> > >>>> David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> wrote: > >>>>> On 08/18/2016 06:58 AM, Richard Owlett wrote: > >>>>>> On 8/17/2016 8:07 PM, David Christensen wrote: > >>>>>>> 3. Internet modem or gateway. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> 3. N/A > >>>>> > >>>>> So, the laptops are not connected to the Internet? How do you access > >>>>> the Internet to post and read this list, download Debian ISO's, etc.? > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> David > >>>> > >>>> Why do they have to be connected to the Internet? I have four > >>>> computers here. Three are not connected, one is. > >>> > >>> So one of Richard's two has to be connected. > >> > >> Not really ;) > >> As I had said in last paragraph of > >> https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2016/08/msg00609.html : > >> "Why would I be interested in ssh as both machines are sitting on > >> my desk and _neither_ will be connected to the internet when > >> ethernet connection is live?" > >> > >> The sole purpose of the Ethernet connection is to avoid > >> sneakernet when transferring small preseed.cfg and script files > >> from the WinXP machine to my Debian experiment. > > > > Correction - or rather, expansion to include what was clearly inferred. > > ;-) > > > > So one of Richard's two has to be connected., AT LEAST FOR SOME OF THE > > TIME. ;-) > > > > Lisi > > NO <GRIN> > I physically have two other machines on my desk which I could > serve nicely to connect to the internet. Connecting either of the > T43 or R61 ha NEVER been considered ;) OK. I misunderstood. I thought you were saying that you only had those two machines, but you don't seem actually to have said it. Mea culpa. So you connect to teh internet how and when? You imply here that oyu odn't use either of thsoe other two machines. At the local library? (I am not being facetious - that is definitely possible.) But you have got an ISP. ISTR you settled on what I think (and I may have it wrong) you (plural) call a limited cell-phone connection. (I don't understand all the terminology, but I think you settled on a limited connection of the same type as what we call 4G and 3G.) > > People keep presuming me to be normal and/or typical. Relatives > gave up that idea eons ago. Whatever gives you the idea that anyone presumes anything of the sort? And what, pray, on this list, is "normal and typical"??? ;-) Lisi
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-19 20:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <s7Wff-e9-13@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #171309 |
On 8/19/2016 9:42 AM, Lisi Reisz wrote: >[snip] >>> >>> So one of Richard's two has to be connected., AT LEAST FOR SOME OF THE >>> TIME. ;-) >>> >>> Lisi >> >> NO <GRIN> >> I physically have two other machines on my desk which I could >> serve nicely to connect to the internet. Connecting either of the >> T43 or R61 ha NEVER been considered ;) > > OK. I misunderstood. I thought you were saying that you only had those two > machines, but you don't seem actually to have said it. Mea culpa. So you > connect to teh internet how and when? You imply here that oyu odn't use > either of thsoe other two machines. At the local library? (I am not being > facetious - that is definitely possible.) But you have got an ISP. ISTR you > settled on what I think (and I may have it wrong) you (plural) call a limited > cell-phone connection. (I don't understand all the terminology, but I think > you settled on a limited connection of the same type as what we call 4G and > 3G.) Are conflating several of my projects. A little over a year ago I was investigating how to replace my dialup connection which was being terminated by my then ISP. My current ISP is now T-Mobile as I purchase one of their Z915's described as "4G LTE Hotspot". I've disabled the "WiFi Hotspot" feature and use it essentially as a modem. This thread is a side issue to a project about configuring Debian Jessie "My Way". To support the multiple re-installations of Debian I have been creating preseed.cfg and various scripts on my WinXP machine. Those files would be written to a flash drive which would then be used on the next iteration of my Debian install. I got tired of sneakernet and decided to connect the two laptops with 36" of Cat6 cable. >> >> People keep presuming me to be normal and/or typical. Relatives >> gave up that idea eons ago. > > Whatever gives you the idea that anyone presumes anything of the sort? And > what, pray, on this list, is "normal and typical"??? ;-) GRIN! > > Lisi > >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 4 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user
csiph-web