Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.debian.user > #187138 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Gary Roach <gary719_list1@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-09-24 03:10 +0200 |
| Last post | 2017-09-26 05:20 +0200 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 102 — 17 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user
Can't find the DNS Servers Gary Roach <gary719_list1@verizon.net> - 2017-09-24 03:10 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Cindy-Sue Causey <butterflybytes@gmail.com> - 2017-09-24 06:40 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Gary Roach <gary719_list1@verizon.net> - 2017-09-25 21:50 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Reco <recoverym4n@gmail.com> - 2017-09-26 09:00 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Richard Hector <richard@walnut.gen.nz> - 2017-09-27 11:20 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Reco <recoverym4n@gmail.com> - 2017-09-27 18:40 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Gary Roach <gary719_list1@verizon.net> - 2017-10-01 22:40 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2017-10-02 04:30 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Gary Roach <gary719_list1@verizon.net> - 2017-10-02 04:30 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Weaver <weaver@riseup.net> - 2017-10-02 04:40 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Reco <recoverym4n@gmail.com> - 2017-10-02 09:10 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2017-10-02 12:30 +0200
Re: E-mail headers 101 (was: Can't find the DNS Servers) Reco <recoverym4n@gmail.com> - 2017-10-02 12:40 +0200
Re: E-mail headers 101 (was: Can't find the DNS Servers) Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2017-10-02 13:00 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2017-10-02 23:10 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Gary Roach <gary719_list1@verizon.net> - 2017-10-03 22:40 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2017-10-04 01:00 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Gary Roach <gary719_list1@verizon.net> - 2017-10-04 01:50 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2017-10-04 14:40 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2017-10-04 19:00 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Reco <recoverym4n@gmail.com> - 2017-10-04 08:20 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2017-10-04 14:30 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Reco <recoverym4n@gmail.com> - 2017-10-04 14:40 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2017-10-04 15:00 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2017-10-04 15:30 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2017-10-04 19:00 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2017-10-04 19:30 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2017-10-04 20:40 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2017-10-05 00:20 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2017-10-05 02:30 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2017-10-05 04:00 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2017-10-06 05:00 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2017-10-06 07:30 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2017-10-06 18:00 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2017-10-05 15:00 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2017-10-06 03:40 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2017-10-06 15:10 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2017-10-06 18:00 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Reco <recoverym4n@gmail.com> - 2017-10-04 20:10 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2017-10-04 20:10 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Reco <recoverym4n@gmail.com> - 2017-10-04 20:20 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2017-10-04 20:40 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Reco <recoverym4n@gmail.com> - 2017-10-04 22:00 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Gary Roach <gary719_list1@verizon.net> - 2017-10-05 01:00 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Reco <recoverym4n@gmail.com> - 2017-10-05 08:30 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Gary Roach <gary719_list1@verizon.net> - 2017-10-04 22:10 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Reco <recoverym4n@gmail.com> - 2017-10-04 22:50 +0200
Re: (solved) Can't find the DNS Servers Gary Roach <gary719_list1@verizon.net> - 2017-10-05 19:10 +0200
Re: (solved) Can't find the DNS Servers Reco <recoverym4n@gmail.com> - 2017-10-05 19:10 +0200
Re: (solved) Can't find the DNS Servers Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2017-10-05 19:40 +0200
Re: (solved) Can't find the DNS Servers Gary Roach <gary719_list1@verizon.net> - 2017-10-05 20:40 +0200
Re: (solved) Can't find the DNS Servers Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2017-10-06 16:10 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2017-10-02 23:00 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Reco <recoverym4n@gmail.com> - 2017-10-02 23:40 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2017-10-03 05:10 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2017-09-25 15:00 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Pascal Hambourg <pascal@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2017-09-25 15:20 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2017-09-25 15:30 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Pascal Hambourg <pascal@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2017-09-25 15:50 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2017-09-25 16:00 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Pascal Hambourg <pascal@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2017-09-25 16:30 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Gary Roach <gary719_list1@verizon.net> - 2017-09-30 04:20 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Pascal Hambourg <pascal@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2017-09-30 08:50 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2017-09-30 14:00 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2017-09-25 17:40 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Reco <recoverym4n@gmail.com> - 2017-09-25 18:20 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2017-09-25 18:30 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Reco <recoverym4n@gmail.com> - 2017-09-25 18:40 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2017-09-25 23:40 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2017-09-26 20:00 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2017-09-26 21:10 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Pascal Hambourg <pascal@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2017-09-25 19:40 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2017-09-25 20:00 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Reco <recoverym4n@gmail.com> - 2017-09-25 21:00 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2017-09-25 21:30 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Don Armstrong <don@debian.org> - 2017-09-25 21:30 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2017-09-25 21:50 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Don Armstrong <don@debian.org> - 2017-09-25 23:20 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2017-09-26 15:20 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2017-09-26 15:50 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Darac Marjal <mailinglist@darac.org.uk> - 2017-09-26 16:10 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2017-09-26 17:40 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Pascal Hambourg <pascal@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2017-09-26 16:30 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2017-09-26 17:30 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2017-09-26 17:40 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2017-09-26 17:40 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2017-09-26 18:00 +0200
Finding the appropriate manpage [Re: Can't find the DNS Servers] Don Armstrong <don@debian.org> - 2017-09-26 23:20 +0200
Re: Finding the appropriate manpage [Re: Can't find the DNS Servers] Lck Ras <likcoras@riseup.net> - 2017-09-27 16:20 +0200
Re: Finding the appropriate manpage [Re: Can't find the DNS Servers] Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2017-09-27 17:20 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2017-09-26 00:50 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2017-09-26 20:50 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2017-09-26 21:10 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2017-09-26 21:40 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2017-09-26 21:50 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2017-09-26 22:10 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2017-09-27 05:30 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2017-09-27 00:50 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2017-09-26 21:30 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2017-09-26 21:50 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2017-09-27 05:40 +0200
Re: Can't find the DNS Servers Celejar <celejar@gmail.com> - 2017-09-26 05:20 +0200
Page 2 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 Next page →
| From | Reco <recoverym4n@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-10-04 08:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <uwLcd-2Je-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #187536 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
Hi.
On Tue, Oct 03, 2017 at 01:30:11PM -0700, Gary Roach wrote:
> OK Rico> I followed your instructions and still have the same problem.
> Attached are the new files. Already installed were isc-dhcp-client and
> resolvconf. You are right about the br1 entry not being needed. the virtual
> machine works fine without it.
So, what we have now is a definite improvement over the last time, but
some twists are needed.
While "dns-nameserver" stanzas are working now, your DHCP server also
advertises its own:
> # Dynamic resolv.conf(5) file for glibc resolver(3) generated by resolvconf(8)
> # DO NOT EDIT THIS FILE BY HAND -- YOUR CHANGES WILL BE OVERWRITTEN
> nameserver 192.168.1.1
> nameserver 8.8.8.8
> nameserver 8.8.4.4
A correct way to fix this is to "persuade" your DHCP server not to
provide DNS information.
Even more correct way is to force your DNS-at-DHCP to use 8.8.8.8 as
forwarder DNS.
Since it's unnaturally complex to do so in a consumer-grade routers, a
hack is in order.
Locate /etc/dhcp/dhclient.conf. Replace inside it:
request subnet-mask, broadcast-address, time-offset, routers,
domain-name, domain-name-servers, domain-search, host-name
dhcp6.name-servers, dhcp6.domain-search, dhcp6.fqdn…
with:
request subnet-mask, broadcast-address, time-offset, routers,
domain-name,
dhcp6.name-servers, dhcp6.domain-search, dhcp6.fqdn…
Bounce your primary network interface.
I've attached diff to this e-mail for this modification.
Reco
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-10-04 14:30 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <uwQYh-6cW-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #187543 |
On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 09:11:37AM +0300, Reco wrote: > Locate /etc/dhcp/dhclient.conf. Replace inside it: > > request subnet-mask, broadcast-address, time-offset, routers, > domain-name, domain-name-servers, domain-search, host-name > dhcp6.name-servers, dhcp6.domain-search, dhcp6.fqdn… > > with: > > request subnet-mask, broadcast-address, time-offset, routers, > domain-name, > dhcp6.name-servers, dhcp6.domain-search, dhcp6.fqdn… See, this is exactly what works for me on one network but NOT on another. It may work great for the OP of this thread. It may not. Just a warning.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Reco <recoverym4n@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-10-04 14:40 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <uwR7X-6fP-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #187545 |
Hi. On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 08:24:16AM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote: > On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 09:11:37AM +0300, Reco wrote: > > Locate /etc/dhcp/dhclient.conf. Replace inside it: > > > > request subnet-mask, broadcast-address, time-offset, routers, > > domain-name, domain-name-servers, domain-search, host-name > > dhcp6.name-servers, dhcp6.domain-search, dhcp6.fqdn… > > > > with: > > > > request subnet-mask, broadcast-address, time-offset, routers, > > domain-name, > > dhcp6.name-servers, dhcp6.domain-search, dhcp6.fqdn… > > See, this is exactly what works for me on one network but NOT on another. > It may work great for the OP of this thread. It may not. > > Just a warning. Have a patience ☺ All goes according to the plan. We'll try [1] next if this one fails. I mean - if a Debian Developer proposes it - it should be good, right? Reco [1] https://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/20170925192045.s7cpppcrpujboqzl@qor.donarmstrong.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-10-04 15:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <uwRrk-6m8-13@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #187545 |
On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 08:24:16AM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:
>On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 09:11:37AM +0300, Reco wrote:
>> Locate /etc/dhcp/dhclient.conf. Replace inside it:
>>
>> request subnet-mask, broadcast-address, time-offset, routers,
>> domain-name, domain-name-servers, domain-search, host-name
>> dhcp6.name-servers, dhcp6.domain-search, dhcp6.fqdn…
>>
>> with:
>>
>> request subnet-mask, broadcast-address, time-offset, routers,
>> domain-name,
>> dhcp6.name-servers, dhcp6.domain-search, dhcp6.fqdn…
>
>See, this is exactly what works for me on one network but NOT on another.
>It may work great for the OP of this thread. It may not.
Yes, that change only causes the dhcp client to stop asking for a name
server--it does not stop the dhcp server from sending a name server, or
the client from parsing what the server sends.
If you are not using resolvconf, a reliable way to stop the isc dhcp
client from updating resolv.conf is to create
/etc/dhcp/dhclient-enter-hooks.d/xlocal-nodnsupdate
containing
#!/bin/sh
make_resolv_conf(){ :; }
This overrides the default function. Make sure that file is executable
(chmod +x /etc/dhcp/dhclient-enter-hooks.d/xlocal-nodnsupdate)
If you are using resolvconf there are other approaches. You might try
looking at /etc/resolvconf/interface-order (man interface-order) and
possibly adding something like @enp*([^.]).inet early in the list.
Mike Stone
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-10-04 15:30 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <uwRUl-6L2-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #187548 |
On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 08:55:51AM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
> If you are not using resolvconf, a reliable way to stop the isc dhcp client
> from updating resolv.conf is to create
> /etc/dhcp/dhclient-enter-hooks.d/xlocal-nodnsupdate containing
>
> #!/bin/sh
> make_resolv_conf(){ :; }
You don't need the shebang. These are dotted in, not executed.
> This overrides the default function. Make sure that file is executable
> (chmod +x /etc/dhcp/dhclient-enter-hooks.d/xlocal-nodnsupdate)
... oh shit, you DO need to set the stupid execute bit, at least
according to dhclient-script(8).
Now I've gotta go run a bunch of chmod commands on all these machines.
To set a bit on a file that is simply read, and should not need an
execute bit. And I had thought I was done. *sigh*
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-10-04 19:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <uwVbz-i3-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #187543 |
On Wed 04 Oct 2017 at 09:11:37 (+0300), Reco wrote: > Hi. > > On Tue, Oct 03, 2017 at 01:30:11PM -0700, Gary Roach wrote: > > OK Rico> I followed your instructions and still have the same problem. > > Attached are the new files. Already installed were isc-dhcp-client and > > resolvconf. You are right about the br1 entry not being needed. the virtual > > machine works fine without it. > > So, what we have now is a definite improvement over the last time, but > some twists are needed. > > While "dns-nameserver" stanzas are working now, your DHCP server also > advertises its own: > > > # Dynamic resolv.conf(5) file for glibc resolver(3) generated by resolvconf(8) > > # DO NOT EDIT THIS FILE BY HAND -- YOUR CHANGES WILL BE OVERWRITTEN > > nameserver 192.168.1.1 > > nameserver 8.8.8.8 > > nameserver 8.8.4.4 > > A correct way to fix this is to "persuade" your DHCP server not to > provide DNS information. > Even more correct way is to force your DNS-at-DHCP to use 8.8.8.8 as > forwarder DNS. > Since it's unnaturally complex to do so in a consumer-grade routers, a > hack is in order. But won't that send local host lookups to google which won't have a clue? Cheers, David.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-10-04 19:30 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <uwVEC-Gu-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #187558 |
On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 11:59:04AM -0500, David Wright wrote: > On Wed 04 Oct 2017 at 09:11:37 (+0300), Reco wrote: > > A correct way to fix this is to "persuade" your DHCP server not to > > provide DNS information. > > Even more correct way is to force your DNS-at-DHCP to use 8.8.8.8 as > > forwarder DNS. > > Since it's unnaturally complex to do so in a consumer-grade routers, a > > hack is in order. > > But won't that send local host lookups to google which won't have a clue? Which problem are we attempting to solve, exactly? I seem to recall that the reported symptom was "I can't do apt-get update", which means the priority is getting real Internet DNS resolution working. If there's a need to add local area network hosts, then *after* the real Internet DNS is working, the OP can decide whether to add LAN hosts to /etc/hosts on each machine, or to set up a LAN DNS nameserver, and wrangle resolv.conf and/or DHCP to point to it. (Many steps and details omitted here for simplicity's sake.) Which way the OP *should* go depends mostly on how many LAN hosts we're talking about. Which way they *will* go... anyone's guess.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-10-04 20:40 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <uwWKl-1ng-7@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #187561 |
On Wed 04 Oct 2017 at 13:21:02 (-0400), Greg Wooledge wrote: > On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 11:59:04AM -0500, David Wright wrote: > > On Wed 04 Oct 2017 at 09:11:37 (+0300), Reco wrote: > > > A correct way to fix this is to "persuade" your DHCP server not to > > > provide DNS information. > > > Even more correct way is to force your DNS-at-DHCP to use 8.8.8.8 as > > > forwarder DNS. > > > Since it's unnaturally complex to do so in a consumer-grade routers, a > > > hack is in order. > > > > But won't that send local host lookups to google which won't have a clue? > > Which problem are we attempting to solve, exactly? I seem to recall > that the reported symptom was "I can't do apt-get update", which means > the priority is getting real Internet DNS resolution working. "I can't even reach the other computers on my home network if I use their names. IP addresses work OK." as well. > If there's a need to add local area network hosts, then *after* the real > Internet DNS is working, the OP can decide whether to add LAN hosts > to /etc/hosts on each machine, or to set up a LAN DNS nameserver, and > wrangle resolv.conf and/or DHCP to point to it. (Many steps and details > omitted here for simplicity's sake.) I'm obviously out of my league. I was under the impression that everyone set up networking by working outwards from the loopback interface to the universe, rather than the other way round. > Which way the OP *should* go depends mostly on how many LAN hosts we're > talking about. Which way they *will* go... anyone's guess. As I just posted, I thought the OP was already using a DNS server in the Actiontec router. (I don't have that choice.) Cheers, David.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-10-05 00:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <ux0bf-3LG-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #187566 |
On Wednesday 04 October 2017 14:35:25 David Wright wrote: > On Wed 04 Oct 2017 at 13:21:02 (-0400), Greg Wooledge wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 11:59:04AM -0500, David Wright wrote: > > > On Wed 04 Oct 2017 at 09:11:37 (+0300), Reco wrote: > > > > A correct way to fix this is to "persuade" your DHCP server not > > > > to provide DNS information. > > > > Even more correct way is to force your DNS-at-DHCP to use > > > > 8.8.8.8 as forwarder DNS. > > > > Since it's unnaturally complex to do so in a consumer-grade > > > > routers, a hack is in order. > > > > > > But won't that send local host lookups to google which won't have > > > a clue? > > > > Which problem are we attempting to solve, exactly? I seem to recall > > that the reported symptom was "I can't do apt-get update", which > > means the priority is getting real Internet DNS resolution working. > > "I can't even reach the other computers on my home network if I use > their names. IP addresses work OK." as well. > You probably could if you enter their addresses and names in your /etc/hosts file, and you can run the identical /etc/hosts file on every machine on your home network. That /etc/hosts file will resemble this one: oot@coyote:~# cat /etc/hosts 127.0.0.1 localhost 192.168.xx.1 router.coyote.den router 192.168.xx.2 rock64Sheldon.coyote.den rock64 rock64Sheldon 192.168.xx.3 coyote.coyote.den coyote 192.168.xx.4 shop.coyote.den shop 192.168.xx.5 lathe.coyote.den lathe 192.168.xx.6 lappy.coyote.den lappy 192.168.xx.7 sheldon.coyote.den sheldon 192.168.xx.8 raspberrypi.coyote.den raspi 192.168.xx.9 odroid64.coyote.den odroid64 192.168.xx.10 GO704.coyote.den GO704 192.168.xx.12 picnc.coyote.den picnc 192.168.xx.21 scanner.coyote.den scanner # The following lines are desirable for IPv6 capable hosts ::1 localhost ip6-localhost ip6-loopback ff02::1 ip6-allnodes ff02::2 ip6-allrouters Replace the xx.#, the FQDN names and aliases, with yours. And note too that you can have more than 1 alias as I show for xx.2 above. If you have network-mangler installed and running, stop it and remove it else you may have to make your /etc/resolv.conf into a normal file, make the nameservers work, then chattr +i resolv.conf to keep n-m from tearing down a working network. It should, if your router runs something like dnsmasq, be sufficient to point the nameserver entry in your resolv.conf at the router, which will, if its internal lookups fail, forward the dns request to your ISP's dns servers. That adds about 60 milliseconds to the ping time of some site never visited before. > > If there's a need to add local area network hosts, then *after* the > > real Internet DNS is working, the OP can decide whether to add LAN > > hosts to /etc/hosts on each machine, or to set up a LAN DNS > > nameserver, and wrangle resolv.conf and/or DHCP to point to it. > > (Many steps and details omitted here for simplicity's sake.) > > I'm obviously out of my league. I was under the impression that > everyone set up networking by working outwards from the loopback > interface to the universe, rather than the other way round. Basically that is how it works. > > > Which way the OP *should* go depends mostly on how many LAN hosts > > we're talking about. Which way they *will* go... anyone's guess. Your /etc/hosts file can have, IIRC, up to 253 ipv4 entries. And it still is identical on all machines provided they all know their assigned names. Check that by running hostname w/o an argument. See man hostname, ditto for domainname. > As I just posted, I thought the OP was already using a DNS server in > the Actiontec router. (I don't have that choice.) > Why not David? Get one that has enough memory to be reflashed with dd-wrt, which will have that feature, and since its .de sourced, not at all likely to have any back doors for the 3 letter agencies. Most routers in the $70+ category can do that. In way over a decade, only one person has come thru dd-wrt and I had to give him all the usernames and passwd's to do so. I needed his expertise at the time. Buffalo sells several with dd-wrt already installed, but their branding covered up a needed section of the setup, so I had to go get the real thing from the dd-wrt site & install it. Shrug. > Cheers, > David. Cheers David, Gene Heskett -- "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author) Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-10-05 02:30 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <ux2d3-55P-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #187572 |
On Wed 04 Oct 2017 at 18:14:12 (-0400), Gene Heskett wrote: > On Wednesday 04 October 2017 14:35:25 David Wright wrote: > > > On Wed 04 Oct 2017 at 13:21:02 (-0400), Greg Wooledge wrote: > > > On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 11:59:04AM -0500, David Wright wrote: > > > > On Wed 04 Oct 2017 at 09:11:37 (+0300), Reco wrote: > > > > > A correct way to fix this is to "persuade" your DHCP server not > > > > > to provide DNS information. > > > > > Even more correct way is to force your DNS-at-DHCP to use > > > > > 8.8.8.8 as forwarder DNS. > > > > > Since it's unnaturally complex to do so in a consumer-grade > > > > > routers, a hack is in order. > > > > > > > > But won't that send local host lookups to google which won't have > > > > a clue? > > > > > > Which problem are we attempting to solve, exactly? I seem to recall > > > that the reported symptom was "I can't do apt-get update", which > > > means the priority is getting real Internet DNS resolution working. > > > > "I can't even reach the other computers on my home network if I use > > their names. IP addresses work OK." as well. > > > You probably could if you enter their addresses and names in > your /etc/hosts file, and you can run the identical /etc/hosts file on > every machine on your home network. Yes, I do that. The OP is presumably used to not having to do that. > If you have network-mangler installed and running, stop it and remove it > else you may have to make your /etc/resolv.conf into a normal file, make > the nameservers work, then chattr +i resolv.conf to keep n-m from > tearing down a working network. > > It should, if your router runs something like dnsmasq, be sufficient to > point the nameserver entry in your resolv.conf at the router, which > will, if its internal lookups fail, forward the dns request to your > ISP's dns servers. That adds about 60 milliseconds to the ping time of > some site never visited before. Yes, I do that. As stated below, there are no internal lookups, but the router has google nameservers configured in place of its downloading them from my ISP. > > > If there's a need to add local area network hosts, then *after* the > > > real Internet DNS is working, the OP can decide whether to add LAN > > > hosts to /etc/hosts on each machine, or to set up a LAN DNS > > > nameserver, and wrangle resolv.conf and/or DHCP to point to it. > > > (Many steps and details omitted here for simplicity's sake.) > > > > I'm obviously out of my league. I was under the impression that > > everyone set up networking by working outwards from the loopback > > interface to the universe, rather than the other way round. > > Basically that is how it works. Well, thank you. But this doesn't explain the paragraph above my comment. I'm just trying to understand the suggestions being made by more experienced folk here, like Reco and Greg. I suppose the main things I don't understand are: why set up the DNS to resolve externals' addresses before internals'; why send LAN DNS queries out to 8.8.8.8 before consulting the LAN's own server; why, on a home network, set external servers (like 8.8.8.8) in all the hosts' resolv.conf if the router itself can pass queries to them. After all, if the router's not up, then those external servers are unreachable anyway. > > > Which way the OP *should* go depends mostly on how many LAN hosts > > > we're talking about. Which way they *will* go... anyone's guess. > > Your /etc/hosts file can have, IIRC, up to 253 ipv4 entries. And it still > is identical on all machines provided they all know their assigned > names. Check that by running hostname w/o an argument. See man > hostname, ditto for domainname. Um, I'm not sure what you're remembering. $ wc /etc/hosts 13263 27599 402246 /etc/hosts $ I think there are limits on line length/aliases. > > As I just posted, I thought the OP was already using a DNS server in > > the Actiontec router. (I don't have that choice.) > > > Why not David? Because I have a "plastic" router with a server for DHCP but not DNS. > Get one that has enough memory to be reflashed with > dd-wrt, which will have that feature, and since its .de sourced, not at > all likely to have any back doors for the 3 letter agencies. But why would I buy a wireless router that you don't trust enough to have its wireless turned on? If we spend money here, it'll be for a repeater and/or more homeplug-style devices. > Most routers in the $70+ category can do that. In way over a decade, only > one person has come thru dd-wrt and I had to give him all the usernames > and passwd's to do so. I needed his expertise at the time. > > Buffalo sells several with dd-wrt already installed, but their branding > covered up a needed section of the setup, so I had to go get the real > thing from the dd-wrt site & install it. Shrug. Cheers, David.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-10-05 04:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <ux3C9-5Rt-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #187574 |
On Wednesday 04 October 2017 20:23:51 David Wright wrote: > On Wed 04 Oct 2017 at 18:14:12 (-0400), Gene Heskett wrote: > > On Wednesday 04 October 2017 14:35:25 David Wright wrote: > > > On Wed 04 Oct 2017 at 13:21:02 (-0400), Greg Wooledge wrote: > > > > On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 11:59:04AM -0500, David Wright wrote: > > > > > On Wed 04 Oct 2017 at 09:11:37 (+0300), Reco wrote: > > > > > > A correct way to fix this is to "persuade" your DHCP server > > > > > > not to provide DNS information. > > > > > > Even more correct way is to force your DNS-at-DHCP to use > > > > > > 8.8.8.8 as forwarder DNS. > > > > > > Since it's unnaturally complex to do so in a consumer-grade > > > > > > routers, a hack is in order. > > > > > > > > > > But won't that send local host lookups to google which won't > > > > > have a clue? > > > > > > > > Which problem are we attempting to solve, exactly? I seem to > > > > recall that the reported symptom was "I can't do apt-get > > > > update", which means the priority is getting real Internet DNS > > > > resolution working. > > > > > > "I can't even reach the other computers on my home network if I > > > use their names. IP addresses work OK." as well. > > > > You probably could if you enter their addresses and names in > > your /etc/hosts file, and you can run the identical /etc/hosts file > > on every machine on your home network. > > Yes, I do that. The OP is presumably used to not having to do that. > > > If you have network-mangler installed and running, stop it and > > remove it else you may have to make your /etc/resolv.conf into a > > normal file, make the nameservers work, then chattr +i resolv.conf > > to keep n-m from tearing down a working network. > > > > It should, if your router runs something like dnsmasq, be sufficient > > to point the nameserver entry in your resolv.conf at the router, > > which will, if its internal lookups fail, forward the dns request to > > your ISP's dns servers. That adds about 60 milliseconds to the ping > > time of some site never visited before. > > Yes, I do that. As stated below, there are no internal lookups, > but the router has google nameservers configured in place of its > downloading them from my ISP. > > > > > If there's a need to add local area network hosts, then *after* > > > > the real Internet DNS is working, the OP can decide whether to > > > > add LAN hosts to /etc/hosts on each machine, or to set up a LAN > > > > DNS nameserver, and wrangle resolv.conf and/or DHCP to point to > > > > it. (Many steps and details omitted here for simplicity's sake.) > > > > > > I'm obviously out of my league. I was under the impression that > > > everyone set up networking by working outwards from the loopback > > > interface to the universe, rather than the other way round. > > > > Basically that is how it works. > > Well, thank you. But this doesn't explain the paragraph above my > comment. I'm just trying to understand the suggestions being made by > more experienced folk here, like Reco and Greg. > > I suppose the main things I don't understand are: > why set up the DNS to resolve externals' addresses before internals'; > why send LAN DNS queries out to 8.8.8.8 before consulting the LAN's > own server; why, on a home network, set external servers (like > 8.8.8.8) in all the hosts' resolv.conf if the router itself can pass > queries to them. After all, if the router's not up, then those > external servers are unreachable anyway. > > > > > Which way the OP *should* go depends mostly on how many LAN > > > > hosts we're talking about. Which way they *will* go... anyone's > > > > guess. > > > > Your /etc/hosts file can have, IIRC, up to 253 ipv4 entries. And it > > still is identical on all machines provided they all know their > > assigned names. Check that by running hostname w/o an argument. See > > man hostname, ditto for domainname. > > Um, I'm not sure what you're remembering. > $ wc /etc/hosts > 13263 27599 402246 /etc/hosts > $ > I think there are limits on line length/aliases. > > > > As I just posted, I thought the OP was already using a DNS server > > > in the Actiontec router. (I don't have that choice.) > > > > Why not David? > > Because I have a "plastic" router with a server for DHCP but not DNS. > > > Get one that has enough memory to be reflashed with > > dd-wrt, which will have that feature, and since its .de sourced, not > > at all likely to have any back doors for the 3 letter agencies. > > But why would I buy a wireless router that you don't trust enough > to have its wireless turned on? > A, I don't have it bridged to my network, so the wifi in the buffalo can't get into me, only to the internet but that hasn't stopped an enterprising neighbor from achieving a wpsk login and watching 80 gigs of whatever a month, so the radio remains turned off until one of my boys drives in from Nebraska or Kansas, and wants his smartphone to be able to access his email or whatever. Thats just common sense. Security, and universal access for critter phones do not seem to play in the same arena. So the ultimate defense is the wifi's power switch. I assume that same neighbor found the radio in an r-pi-3b thats been running one of my cnc'd lathes for about 8 months, got a local address from the dd-wrt dhcpd server, and which a jessie install enabled w/o asking me, but that traffic I can see on the gkrellm tallies, so that got powered down the next day. And B,C,D,E & F: security. > If we spend money here, it'll be for a repeater and/or more > homeplug-style devices. A wifi repeater? You can drive an 88,000 lb load of cold swinging beef thru that security hole. Homeplug-style I assume is some sort of a powerline carried network?, x10 on an overdose of bandwidth steroids? Explain plz if you've the time. > > Most routers in the $70+ category can do that. In way over a decade, > > only one person has come thru dd-wrt and I had to give him all the > > usernames and passwd's to do so. I needed his expertise at the time. > > > > Buffalo sells several with dd-wrt already installed, but their > > branding covered up a needed section of the setup, so I had to go > > get the real thing from the dd-wrt site & install it. Shrug. > > Cheers, > David. Cheers, Gene Heskett -- "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author) Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-10-06 05:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <uxr1L-3D5-7@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #187575 |
On Wed 04 Oct 2017 at 21:56:13 (-0400), Gene Heskett wrote: > On Wednesday 04 October 2017 20:23:51 David Wright wrote: > > > On Wed 04 Oct 2017 at 18:14:12 (-0400), Gene Heskett wrote: > > > On Wednesday 04 October 2017 14:35:25 David Wright wrote: > > > > As I just posted, I thought the OP was already using a DNS server > > > > in the Actiontec router. (I don't have that choice.) > > > > > > Why not David? > > > > Because I have a "plastic" router with a server for DHCP but not DNS. > > > > > Get one that has enough memory to be reflashed with > > > dd-wrt, which will have that feature, and since its .de sourced, not > > > at all likely to have any back doors for the 3 letter agencies. > > > > But why would I buy a wireless router that you don't trust enough > > to have its wireless turned on? > > > A, I don't have it bridged to my network, so the wifi in the buffalo > can't get into me, only to the internet but that hasn't stopped an > enterprising neighbor from achieving a wpsk login and watching 80 gigs > of whatever a month, so the radio remains turned off until one of my > boys drives in from Nebraska or Kansas, and wants his smartphone to be > able to access his email or whatever. Thats just common sense. > Security, and universal access for critter phones do not seem to play in > the same arena. So the ultimate defense is the wifi's power switch. I don't know what wpsk is. Here I use WPA2-PSK(AES) which seems to be secure enough. Our household couldn't function without wifi which is why we bought a wifi router. > I assume that same neighbor found the radio in an r-pi-3b thats been > running one of my cnc'd lathes for about 8 months, got a local address > from the dd-wrt dhcpd server, and which a jessie install enabled w/o > asking me, but that traffic I can see on the gkrellm tallies, so that > got powered down the next day. > > And B,C,D,E & F: security. I have no idea what that radio would be running. When I typed the above into google, the one project I looked at was only running WPA-PSK(TKIP). That's hackable, isn't it? > > If we spend money here, it'll be for a repeater and/or more > > homeplug-style devices. > > A wifi repeater? You can drive an 88,000 lb load of cold swinging beef > thru that security hole. Homeplug-style I assume is some sort of a > powerline carried network?, x10 on an overdose of bandwidth steroids? > Explain plz if you've the time. Until recently, our house was serviced by two meters: the new one which comes underground to the new part, the old one which came overhead from the easement (where you'd normally expect a back alley) from a different street. The router sat in the old part (where the Cox cable comes in from the same pole as the old overhead power), and we used it from the new part, with very low signal strengths. Now we've connected the giant cable between the two breaker boxes and removed the old meter, we can use Powerline 1200s to link the modem (old part) to router (new part, where we are). Once we've remodelled the old part and start using it more, we could use more Powerlines¹ for static things like TV, but will probably need wifi there as well. One advantage of Powerlines is that they aren't bothered by microwaves which knock out nearby 2GHz devices. 5GHz isn't bothered by the microwaves, but this part of the house seems rather solidly built and I'm disappointed by the 5GHz performance here compared with our previous house. By the time we've wrecked the inside of the old part, the more open layout (the "reception rooms" in UK parlance) might suit 5GHz a bit better. ¹We'll have to change the whole topology of course, because at the moment the pair of Powerlines are carrying the (unshareable) WAN side of the router rather than the LAN side. Cheers, David.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-10-06 07:30 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <uxtmV-5my-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #187603 |
On Thursday 05 October 2017 22:56:33 David Wright wrote: > On Wed 04 Oct 2017 at 21:56:13 (-0400), Gene Heskett wrote: > > On Wednesday 04 October 2017 20:23:51 David Wright wrote: > > > On Wed 04 Oct 2017 at 18:14:12 (-0400), Gene Heskett wrote: > > > > On Wednesday 04 October 2017 14:35:25 David Wright wrote: > > > > > As I just posted, I thought the OP was already using a DNS > > > > > server in the Actiontec router. (I don't have that choice.) > > > > > > > > Why not David? > > > > > > Because I have a "plastic" router with a server for DHCP but not > > > DNS. > > > > > > > Get one that has enough memory to be reflashed with > > > > dd-wrt, which will have that feature, and since its .de sourced, > > > > not at all likely to have any back doors for the 3 letter > > > > agencies. > > > > > > But why would I buy a wireless router that you don't trust enough > > > to have its wireless turned on? > > > > A, I don't have it bridged to my network, so the wifi in the buffalo > > can't get into me, only to the internet but that hasn't stopped an > > enterprising neighbor from achieving a wpsk login and watching 80 > > gigs of whatever a month, so the radio remains turned off until one > > of my boys drives in from Nebraska or Kansas, and wants his > > smartphone to be able to access his email or whatever. Thats just > > common sense. Security, and universal access for critter phones do > > not seem to play in the same arena. So the ultimate defense is the > > wifi's power switch. > > I don't know what wpsk is. Probably a typu. Whatever, I had setup a passphrase that was the first chapter of a novel, and their gear had zero trouble kicking in the door > Here I use WPA2-PSK(AES) which seems > to be secure enough. Our household couldn't function without > wifi which is why we bought a wifi router. > > > I assume that same neighbor found the radio in an r-pi-3b thats been > > running one of my cnc'd lathes for about 8 months, got a local > > address from the dd-wrt dhcpd server, and which a jessie install > > enabled w/o asking me, but that traffic I can see on the gkrellm > > tallies, so that got powered down the next day. > > > > And B,C,D,E & F: security. > > I have no idea what that radio would be running. When I typed the > above into google, the one project I looked at was only running > WPA-PSK(TKIP). That's hackable, isn't it? From my experience, yes. > > > > If we spend money here, it'll be for a repeater and/or more > > > homeplug-style devices. > > > > A wifi repeater? You can drive an 88,000 lb load of cold swinging > > beef thru that security hole. Homeplug-style I assume is some sort > > of a powerline carried network?, x10 on an overdose of bandwidth > > steroids? Explain plz if you've the time. > > Until recently, our house was serviced by two meters: the new one > which comes underground to the new part, the old one which came > overhead from the easement (where you'd normally expect a back alley) > from a different street. The router sat in the old part (where the > Cox cable comes in from the same pole as the old overhead power), > and we used it from the new part, with very low signal strengths. > > Now we've connected the giant cable between the two breaker boxes > and removed the old meter, we can use Powerline 1200s to link the > modem (old part) to router (new part, where we are). Once we've > remodelled the old part and start using it more, we could use > more Powerlines¹ for static things like TV, but will probably > need wifi there as well. > > One advantage of Powerlines is that they aren't bothered by > microwaves which knock out nearby 2GHz devices. As in cooking microwaves? If its leaking that badly, have it serviced by someone with a leakage measuring apparatus. Or replace it. That level of leakage is sick bird on this side of the pond. I've checked and rechecked the $100, 1kw model I got from wallies to take on the road when I was out doing consultancy things after I retired for a few years, in my kitchen now and can't find it with that meter. 15+ years old now, I've had to replace some of the interlock microswitches, but 30 seconds for a cuppa is still too hot. Sagging doors are the usual suspects. Here we have to leak test our broadcast transmitters and be able to certify they have a leakage field that is less than 5 milliwatts per CC of human flesh exposed or we cannot renew our license. Thats actually an easily detected level but must be measured with an omni-directional antenna. Only one such device is available, and they rent it to us at $275/day. Yeah, I'm actually a retired broadcast engineer. What used to be a 1st phone, and CET cards in my card case. ;-) I recall having to send the meter on to another tv station about 110 miles south of us after I'd logged the measurements from our 50+ yo 35KW GE box, and he was curious and had it running when he walked into the stations lunch room while someone was warming their dinner, and it pegged the meter while still 6 feet away. Needless to say, the vending company it belonged to was onsite in about an hour with a new one, which had zero leakage. > 5GHz isn't > bothered by the microwaves, but this part of the house seems > rather solidly built and I'm disappointed by the 5GHz performance > here compared with our previous house. By the time we've wrecked > the inside of the old part, the more open layout (the "reception > rooms" in UK parlance) might suit 5GHz a bit better. Construction materials generally make good dummy loads at 5GHz. :) Drywall and rock rubble walls seem to absorb it well. One friend of mine on the left coast lives in a 300 yo Spanish Hacienda that covers most of a city block, with interior stone walls a couple feet thick has had to wear out some diamond bits getting cat5 here and there. So yes, I'd expect you'll need repeaters. > ¹We'll have to change the whole topology of course, because at the > moment the pair of Powerlines are carrying the (unshareable) WAN > side of the router rather than the LAN side. > Its an endless process, David. Have fun! > Cheers, > David. Cheers, Gene Heskett -- "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author) Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-10-06 18:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <uxDcC-3oz-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #187604 |
On Fri 06 Oct 2017 at 01:22:18 (-0400), Gene Heskett wrote: > On Thursday 05 October 2017 22:56:33 David Wright wrote: > > One advantage of Powerlines is that they aren't bothered by > > microwaves which knock out nearby 2GHz devices. > > As in cooking microwaves? If its leaking that badly, have it serviced by > someone with a leakage measuring apparatus. Or replace it. That level of > leakage is sick bird on this side of the pond. I've checked and > rechecked the $100, 1kw model I got from wallies to take on the road > when I was out doing consultancy things after I retired for a few years, > in my kitchen now and can't find it with that meter. 15+ years old now, > I've had to replace some of the interlock microswitches, but 30 seconds > for a cuppa is still too hot. Sagging doors are the usual suspects. > > Here we have to leak test our broadcast transmitters and be able to > certify they have a leakage field that is less than 5 milliwatts per CC > of human flesh exposed or we cannot renew our license. I think your fears are misplaced and here's why: 5mW/cm² at 5cm is of course the maximum allowed by µwave ovens once they're sold (1mW at the point of sale). Even at 5m, that would still be 0.5µW/cm² given an air path, which is what there is towards both laptop and TV. The FCC maximum power density for general exposure is about the same, so that gives an approximate value for the maximum signal strength at the router and the laptops/rokus when transmitting. But then we have to add in (or rather subtract) the effects of (a) the three walls and two floor trusses along with all their accessories plus the services and ducts contained in them, which lie between said devices and the router, (b) the fact that information has to be extracted from the carrier signal, and (c) the router has to be able to sort out the competing signals it is receiving from all the sources in the kitchen. Another factor that's probably difficult to estimate is how much the computer devices have attenuated their signal strengths (on the basis of reasonable reception) when the µwave suddenly comes on. Do the devices retrain to the new conditions? How long does that take? Is that why the TV sometimes comes back? This last is complicated because the buffering done by a roku varies by channel, programme material, how far into a programme segment since the last commercial, etc etc. Plenty of imponderables. Cheers, David.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-10-05 15:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <uxdUR-2WJ-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #187574 |
On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 07:23:51PM -0500, David Wright wrote: > Well, thank you. But this doesn't explain the paragraph above my comment. > I'm just trying to understand the suggestions being made by more > experienced folk here, like Reco and Greg. My rationale is that having access to the Internet allows you to look up the answers to your problems, allows you to install missing software, etc. Being able to ping barney from fred on your LAN is pretty unimportant for most problem resolutions, compared to being able to ask Google "how do I set up NAT on Debian stretch", or whatever issue you're currently trying to solve. As far as /etc/hosts vs. setting up an internal DNS server, most home LANs are probably small enough that I would simply use /etc/hosts. Things may change if you live in a mansion with a staff, or you're the landlord for an apartment building, or something. My cut-off point would probably be a dozen machines. If there are more than a dozen machines, then I would consider setting up an internal DNS server for them.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-10-06 03:40 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <uxpMm-2Ns-7@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #187577 |
On Thu 05 Oct 2017 at 08:55:33 (-0400), Greg Wooledge wrote: > On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 07:23:51PM -0500, David Wright wrote: > > Well, thank you. But this doesn't explain the paragraph above my comment. > > I'm just trying to understand the suggestions being made by more > > experienced folk here, like Reco and Greg. > > My rationale is that having access to the Internet allows you to look up > the answers to your problems, allows you to install missing software, etc. > Being able to ping barney from fred on your LAN is pretty unimportant > for most problem resolutions, compared to being able to ask Google "how > do I set up NAT on Debian stretch", or whatever issue you're currently > trying to solve. I had assumed that the OP still had internet access from their other machines. > As far as /etc/hosts vs. setting up an internal DNS server, most home > LANs are probably small enough that I would simply use /etc/hosts. > Things may change if you live in a mansion with a staff, or you're the > landlord for an apartment building, or something. My cut-off point would > probably be a dozen machines. If there are more than a dozen machines, > then I would consider setting up an internal DNS server for them. I always think it odd that a router that issues hostnames and IP addresses to hosts can't spit the same information out when given a DNS query. But I've assumed that setting it up to do so would involve no work; the work is in typing the information into the DHCP pages. So if you have a DNS-serving router, it would seem defeatest to then have to maintain /etc/hosts files, and it just hides the problem which, thankfully, has now been found. Cheers, David.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-10-06 15:10 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <uxAy5-1WT-13@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #187602 |
On Thu, Oct 05, 2017 at 08:35:22PM -0500, David Wright wrote: > On Thu 05 Oct 2017 at 08:55:33 (-0400), Greg Wooledge wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 07:23:51PM -0500, David Wright wrote: > > > Well, thank you. But this doesn't explain the paragraph above my comment. > > > I'm just trying to understand the suggestions being made by more > > > experienced folk here, like Reco and Greg. > > > > My rationale is that having access to the Internet allows you to look up > > the answers to your problems, allows you to install missing software, etc. > > Being able to ping barney from fred on your LAN is pretty unimportant > > for most problem resolutions, compared to being able to ask Google "how > > do I set up NAT on Debian stretch", or whatever issue you're currently > > trying to solve. > > I had assumed that the OP still had internet access from their other > machines. Which is fine for simply asking questions and reading answers, but then if you need to apt-get install something, you're kinda screwed.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-10-06 18:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <uxDcC-3oz-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #187624 |
On Fri 06 Oct 2017 at 09:03:05 (-0400), Greg Wooledge wrote: > On Thu, Oct 05, 2017 at 08:35:22PM -0500, David Wright wrote: > > On Thu 05 Oct 2017 at 08:55:33 (-0400), Greg Wooledge wrote: > > > On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 07:23:51PM -0500, David Wright wrote: > > > > Well, thank you. But this doesn't explain the paragraph above my comment. > > > > I'm just trying to understand the suggestions being made by more > > > > experienced folk here, like Reco and Greg. > > > > > > My rationale is that having access to the Internet allows you to look up > > > the answers to your problems, allows you to install missing software, etc. > > > Being able to ping barney from fred on your LAN is pretty unimportant > > > for most problem resolutions, compared to being able to ask Google "how > > > do I set up NAT on Debian stretch", or whatever issue you're currently > > > trying to solve. > > > > I had assumed that the OP still had internet access from their other > > machines. > > Which is fine for simply asking questions and reading answers, but then > if you need to apt-get install something, you're kinda screwed. USB stick (aka sneakernet). Cheers, David.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Reco <recoverym4n@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-10-04 20:10 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <uwWhk-1bv-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #187558 |
Hi. On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 11:59:04AM -0500, David Wright wrote: > On Wed 04 Oct 2017 at 09:11:37 (+0300), Reco wrote: > > Hi. > > > > On Tue, Oct 03, 2017 at 01:30:11PM -0700, Gary Roach wrote: > > > OK Rico> I followed your instructions and still have the same problem. > > > Attached are the new files. Already installed were isc-dhcp-client and > > > resolvconf. You are right about the br1 entry not being needed. the virtual > > > machine works fine without it. > > > > So, what we have now is a definite improvement over the last time, but > > some twists are needed. > > > > While "dns-nameserver" stanzas are working now, your DHCP server also > > advertises its own: > > > > > # Dynamic resolv.conf(5) file for glibc resolver(3) generated by resolvconf(8) > > > # DO NOT EDIT THIS FILE BY HAND -- YOUR CHANGES WILL BE OVERWRITTEN > > > nameserver 192.168.1.1 > > > nameserver 8.8.8.8 > > > nameserver 8.8.4.4 > > > > A correct way to fix this is to "persuade" your DHCP server not to > > provide DNS information. > > Even more correct way is to force your DNS-at-DHCP to use 8.8.8.8 as > > forwarder DNS. > > Since it's unnaturally complex to do so in a consumer-grade routers, a > > hack is in order. > > But won't that send local host lookups to google which won't have a clue? Why won't it have a clue? "Four eights" is a huge pool of public resolvers. "Free" to use (in a Google sense of a word). An unnamed consumer-grade router will happily pass DNS requests to anywhere. Unless it's been tinkered with, which is outside of scope of this problem. ISP, of course can: 1) Pass DNS request along, as good ISP should. 2) Route DNS queries to *their* DNS servers. Whenever IPS is abided by law to do so or merely tries to hijack NXDOMAIN answers to raise some profit is hardly relevant to the issue. 3) Block DNS requests unless it is going to *their* DNS. Best thing that can be done about this kind of ISP is contract termination. Reco
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-10-04 20:10 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <uwWhl-1bv-21@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #187562 |
On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 08:59:46PM +0300, Reco wrote: >On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 11:59:04AM -0500, David Wright wrote: >> On Wed 04 Oct 2017 at 09:11:37 (+0300), Reco wrote: >> > A correct way to fix this is to "persuade" your DHCP server not to >> > provide DNS information. >> > Even more correct way is to force your DNS-at-DHCP to use 8.8.8.8 as >> > forwarder DNS. >> > Since it's unnaturally complex to do so in a consumer-grade routers, a >> > hack is in order. >> >> But won't that send local host lookups to google which won't have a clue? > >Why won't it have a clue? Because google doesn't know what names you use on your local network. To implement local lookups you need a name server which can selectively either serve a local name or forward the request to an internet name server. That can't be done in resolv.conf, but can be done either centrally or locally via unbound or similar. Mike Stone
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user
csiph-web