vnc problem: unable to connect to vnc server
I am trying, unsuccessfully, to make a VNC connection from Windows98 (office of
my client) to my woody machine. Perhaps I am misunderstanding something about
the usage of VNC, and if anyone could help, I would really appreciate it.
I start the vncserver by
$ vncserver :4,
then check for my password in ~/.vnc/passwd. I discover it to be
\111A\222\333P\444L\555,
I then launch vncviewer from the windows machine, and am prompted for the
address I wish to establish a connection to, I type in "my dynamic ip
address:4", and I am then prompted for "session password", and type
\111A\222\333P\444L\555,
and I get a notification: VNC authentication failed!
Following is the vnc log for this session, and I am unable to decipher what I
am doing incorrectly, and, as mentioned, need help
08/12/00 10:39:35 Xvnc version 3.3.3r2
08/12/00 10:39:35 Copyright (C) AT&T Laboratories Cambridge.
08/12/00 10:39:35 All Rights Reserved.
08/12/00 10:39:35 See http://www.uk.research.att.com/vnc for information on VNC
08/12/00 10:39:35 Desktop name 'X' (pieno:4)
08/12/00 10:39:35 Protocol version supported 3.3
08/12/00 10:39:35 Listening for VNC connections on TCP port 5904
08/12/00 10:39:35 Listening for HTTP connections on TCP port 5804
08/12/00 10:39:35 URL http://pieno:5804
08/12/00 10:41:17 Got connection from client 205.xxx.xx.xxx
08/12/00 10:41:18 Protocol version 3.3
08/12/00 10:42:15 rfbAuthProcessClientMessage: authentication failed from 205.xxx.xx.xxx
08/12/00 10:42:15 Client 205.xxx.xx.xxx gone
08/12/00 10:42:15 Statistics:
08/12/00 10:42:15 framebuffer updates 0, rectangles 0, bytes 0
Any thoughts will be much appreciated. Also, one trivial question, what is the
easiest way for me to determine my ip address. Currently, I check the ppp log
which identifies the address of the local and remote machines when a connetion
is established. This involves "su"ing, opening and scanning the log, looking
for a smarter way. Sorry for the dumb question.
Thanks very much,
--
Giulio Morgan
mickle@panix.com
Reply to: