[SLUG] Re: [MDLUG] FTP woes

From: Bill (selinuxathome@yahoo.com)
Date: Fri Mar 08 2002 - 15:17:29 EST


On Friday 08 March 2002 12:06, you wrote:
> Bill, did you ever get your problem solved?
Yes ... just this moment!

Doh !

Where http://proftpd.linux.co.uk/localsite/Userguide/linked/x877.html had
said:
  "Then add the directive "MasqueradeAddress" in your
  etc/proftpd.conf file to define the public name or IP address of the
  NAT:"
I had mis-understood it to want the gateway address of 192.168.x.x. It didn't
click that this is not a public address. I use the addresses on the inside of
the network so often that I forget that the world can't see them. To ME, that
device is 192.168.x.x; to rest of the WORLD, it is 64.27.213.176. Big
difference.

I set the config file to show
  PassivePorts xxxxx xxxxx
  MasqueradeAddress 64.27.213.176
and then went through the re-start sequence for the server.

I just hit it with Netscape, Galeon, Konqueror, Opera and Gftp (set to
passive) and pftp from the command line. All work!

Thanks tons, Joe ... and Greg and Brett and Steve and Glen and everyone else
who lent me the benefit of their experience and knowledge. This was certainly
a team effort ... one fellow Lugger even stopped by my house for an hour or
so!

Now I need to get back to the router to see if turning off those other 10,000
ports makes a difference. :-) (I just did ... and it does. They gotta be open
in the router.) That much isn't documented anywhere that I can see.

Okay ... this counts as "new information": the hardware router (as mentioned
in the Linux router section of the User Docs) must be set to allow for the
passage of the ports named in the PassivePorts directive set in the
proftpd.conf file. This might not be much new info ... but it could be just
as big of a stopper as using the wrong IP address for the NAT box.

Man o' Manishevitz ... I KNEW that whatever it was would prove to be simple.
I couldn't imagine Linksys releasing a product which broke nearly every
browser out there on ftp accesses. That just didn't seem likely. Nor did it
make sense that Proftpd would become popular if it couldn't be configured to
serve files passively.
 
Bill

Next up ... Postfix and then I am DONE setting up servers for a while!
http -done
ftp -done
ntp -done
smtp -next
...enough is enough! :-)



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 17:55:12 EDT