<< | Thread Index | >> ]    [ << | Date Index | >> ]

Subject: RE: Stable NT based solution
From: "Kim, Sang Dong" <SDoKim,AT,fciconnect,DOT,com>
Date: Sat, 6 Jul 2002 03:52:40 +0200

it's occured as random.
when i stop and start the CIPE service.
it is code reboot.. without any message..
2K or NT 4.0 also same problems.

-----Original Message-----
From: Damion Wilson [mailto:dwilson,AT,ibl,DOT,bm
Sent: Saturday, July 06, 2002 12:31 AM
To: Kim, Sang Dong
Cc: cipe-l,AT,inka,DOT,de
Subject: Re: Stable NT based solution

Which one crashes ? NT4 or Win2K (or both) ?

What does the BSOD message (the top line) say ?

DKW

On Friday 05 July 2002 05:26 am, Kim, Sang Dong wrote:
> Hi, I'm a user of NT based CIPE.
>
> I'm using the NT based CIPE
> Windows NT 4.0 and Windows 2K,
> Both of CIPE working but, it is sometime stop the service.
> and when we start and stop the service..
> it is cold rebooting... one side only..
> I think that NT version still has small packet problem.
> and i am using a sygate as a NAT.
> when i use some of encripted site.. it is stop working..
> Just it is my experiance.
> I'm waiting to be solved it.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Damion Wilson [mailto:dwilson,AT,ibl,DOT,bm
> Sent: Friday, July 05, 2002 4:27 AM
> To: Yves Smolders
> Cc: cipe-l,AT,inka,DOT,de
> Subject: Re: Stable NT based solution
>
>
> I know you weren't being insulting, but this is Open Source (or FreeWare,
> or
>
> whatever we're calling ourselves this week), so it's up to all of us to
fix
> the things that ail us :-)
>
> You can run CIPE over any UDP port/s you choose to. If you want to use the
> SSH
> or NTP port numbers, that's fine. If you do a netstat -a and the UDP port
> that you want to use isn't bound by any other application, go for it.
>
> I think that there are a few people using it successfully for various
> situations. I'd be interested in knowing if the NT4 box crashes
> consistently
>
> when doing large data transfers over the tunnel, and what the BSOD
messages
> say...
>
> It should be even easier than that. The original scenario for CIPE-Win32
> was
>
> for a remote user to connect to an internal Sybase database. CIPE-Win32
was
> left running all the time so the link always appeared to be up, but, of
> course, tunnel packets could only be transferred when his computer was
> connected to his ISP. If you dispense with the dialup metaphor, it
actually
> gets simpler. You can then shut it down whenever you want or change the
key
> whenever you want. If you reboot the box, it comes back to where it was
> with
>
> no extra interaction.
>
> I never liked the dialup semantics used by PPTP. This stuff should be
> non-intrusive instead of in your face all the time. VPN software doesn't
do
> all that much user interaction and all it really needs from the user is a
> session key or passphrase. You should be able to stop it and start it when
> you want to, but that should be a button pressing kind of action, not the
> way
> those guys went about it.
>
> DKW
>
> On Thursday 04 July 2002 03:47 pm, you wrote:
> > Sorry Damion,
> >
> > I wasn't trying to write off your work as being unstable.
> >
> > The best price/perfomance internet solution for soho that we have here
in
> > Belgium is a product from Telenet called Pandora Pro.
> >
> > It's a cable modem solution without fixed IP address, but it's used
> > frequently in Belgium.
> >
> > In order to have VPN's over this link, I need to search for non-standard
> > solutions as Telenet has a very harsh policy.  They don't allow IP
> > traffic below port 1024 from and to the internet and their DHCP renew
> > time is...
>
> 30
>
> > minutes!  Sometimes they even force the issue and disconnect & reconnect
> > cable modems that are up for a long time...
> >
> > So I turned to CIPE, and some dynamic DNS program to fix those variable
> > addresses.
> >
> > With the latest build on a win2000 machine on one side and an NT4 server
> > SP5 at the other, when retrieving POP3 e-mail from an nt server, the
>
> latter
>
> > just rebooted at a certain moment.
> >
> > I admit I should try some more configurations, the problem might be at
my
> > end.  I was just inquiring if anyone succesfully is running
Cipe-Windows,
> > and what platforms they are using, so that I can test on the right
> > platforms right away.
> >
> > CIPE is really nice for LAN-to-LAN solutions.  In the future it would be
> > really nice if the CIPE adapter could be transformed into a dial-up
>
> adapter
>
> > so it can be used to "dial-in" when nescessary; just like PPTP and IPSEC
> > clients
> >
> > Yves Smolders
> > Hofline International
> > yves,AT,hofline,DOT,be
> > tel +32 15 55 47 20
> > fax +32 15 55 46 70
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Damion Wilson" <dwilson,AT,ibl,DOT,bm>
> > To: "Yves Smolders" <yves.smolders,AT,pandora,DOT,be>
> > Cc: <cipe-l,AT,inka,DOT,de>
> > Sent: Thursday, July 04, 2002 8:32 PM
> > Subject: Re: Stable NT based solution
> >
> >
> > My test setup is three machines using three point to point links. One is
> > Win2K, one is NT4.0 and the other is Mandrake 8.1. The test procedure is
> > a constant data transfer over each of the links (for weeks).
> >
> > I would rather know what the problem is instead of writing things off as
> > "Not
> > Stable Yet"
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > DKW
> >
> > On Thursday 04 July 2002 11:16 am, Yves Smolders wrote:
> > > Peter,
> > >
> > > I do not intend to connect them straight to the net, there is adequate
> > > firewalling at each side.  (FreeBSD bridging firewalls with shaping)
> > >
> > > The problem is, I like Cipe but I'm not very experienced with linux
> > > just yet.  It's a shame the NT versions aren't stable yet...
> > >
> > > Yves Smolders
> > > Hofline International
> > > yves,AT,hofline,DOT,be
> > > tel +32 15 55 47 20
> > > fax +32 15 55 46 70
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Peter van den Heuvel" <peter,AT,bank-connect,DOT,com>
> > > Cc: <cipe-l,AT,inka,DOT,de>
> > > Sent: Thursday, July 04, 2002 12:46 PM
> > > Subject: Re: Stable NT based solution
> > >
> > > > > Does anyone here have tips on how to make 2 NT based machines
> > >
> > > (2000/XP/NT)
> > >
> > > > > connect stable?
> > > >
> > > > I never use Microsoft boxes directly on the net. There's always a
>
> Linux
>
> > > > firewalling and cipe box in between. And that's just as stable as my
> > > > ISP connections. For your average DSL you could probably run a 386
>
> with
>
> > > > a hand built 2.2 kernel. I'm not saying that NT would be bad, just
>
> that
>
> > > > the relevant Cipe implementation is not yet as mature and that a
>
> decent
>
> > > > firewall seems harder to get right.
> > > >
> > > > Peter
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Message sent by the cipe-l,AT,inka,DOT,de mailing list.
> > > > Unsubscribe: mail majordomo,AT,inka,DOT,de, "unsubscribe cipe-l" in 
> > > > body
> > > > Other commands available with "help" in body to the same address.
> > > > CIPE info and list archive:
> > >
> > > <URL:http://sites.inka.de/~bigred/devel/cipe.html>





<< | Thread Index | >> ]    [ << | Date Index | >> ]