Re: SSH: does it require portmapper and what hostname is it looking for?
On 21 Feb 2004, Monique Y. Herman wrote:
>
[snip]
Monique, I really am grateful to you for supplying this information;
exactly what I was looking for. I've adopted your suggested format for
/etc/hosts.
> > The lan IP address in the router is 192.168.0.20, which is why I had it
> > in /etc/hosts.
>
> That part is good! I was questioning the mixture of 192.168.0.x with
> 10.0.0.x. Generally speaking, you want the IP addresses of your
> machines to look very similar to the IP address of your router.
>
> > I added the 192... business because I read in various places that you
> > were supposed to have this line (I didn't previously) and because
> > without it all hostname commands (hostname, hostname -f, hostname -s)
> > produce the same thing, i.e. just arcadia. But perhaps that doesn't
> > matter? I've taken it out at present.
>
> No, it matters =)
>
I've followed your advice and put in the IP from the router. I'd thought
earlier that I should put in the IP that my domain name resolves to
(194.176.77.5), but obviously that is the same for both computers, which
is what was troubling me when I started this thread.
> > The 0.0.0.0 line also came from a how-to I found on the Net, but I've
> > taken it out.
>
> I can't swear that you don't need it. I just know that I don't have
> one, and my setup works.
>
>
[snip]
> All of that looks good. For comparison's sake, why don't I show you the
> relevant portions of /etc/network/interfaces and /etc/hosts on one of my
> machines? (I'm ignoring the loopback entry in interfaces; that should
> be fine.)
>
> Okay, I'm munging things a bit, but the sense should still be there:
[snip]
A commented example of a working setup - brilliant! Just what I was
hoping for.
Thanks again.
Anthony
--
ac@acampbell.org.uk || http://www.acampbell.org.uk
using Linux GNU/Debian || for book reviews, electronic
Windows-free zone || books and skeptical articles
Reply to: