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

To: Naoki <i_naoki,AT,mbf,DOT,nifty,DOT,com>
Subject: Re: Redhat9 CIPE
From: Renato Salles <rsalles,AT,rsnetservices,DOT,com,DOT,br>
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2003 17:17:38 -0300 (BRT)
Cc: cipe-l,AT,inka,DOT,de
In-reply-to: <000401c351ff$a31b6de0$c801a8c0@naoki3>

I don't think so. If you use iptables, you must permit to forward udp 
packets at port 137-138-139 from the peer's address to your LAN, or you'll 
have so long delays in authentication and browsing that the win32 machine 
will just give up. I made myself like that around here and everything goes 
like a charm.

HTH,

RSalles

On Fri, 25 Jul 2003, Naoki wrote:

> Maybe,
> 
>  I found the reason just now.
> 
>  CIPE cannot treat UDP(port137:139) packet for encapsulation.
> 
>  Is that correct ?
> 
>  If correct, I must build Samba in Firewall system......
> 
>  Are not there is a good idea ?
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Naoki" <i_naoki,AT,mbf,DOT,nifty,DOT,com>
> To: <cipe-l,AT,inka,DOT,de>
> Sent: Friday, July 25, 2003 12:38 AM
> Subject: Re: Redhat9 CIPE
> 
> 
> > By the way,
> > 
> >  Are there any ways to see NetBIOS name without wins server ?
> > 
> >  Though I knew the necessity of wins server standardly, I expect
> > that I can see NetBIOS name without wins server.
> > 
> >  I guess, if iptables accepts port 137:139 for CIPE, I can see it.
> > 
> >  How is my guess ?
> 
> --
> 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 | >> ]