On Thu, Aug 05, 2010 at 11:36:13AM -0400, Steve Davidson wrote:
standard email clients but would also like to be able to ssh into a
local box and read mail via a character terminal.
I use a variety of OS platforms to provide email availability and I have found
that either NetBSD or Linux is the easiest to deal with and since you already
have Linux that would be the direction I would suggest.
As much as I'd love to run a mail server on VMS, I would have to agree with Steve
on this one.
As to accessing mail from a terminal vi ssh, I do exactly that myself. What I have
been doing is I run mutt locally on the mail server, but I've configured it to use
IMAP to access the mail server. It has worked very well.
-brian
--
"Coding in C is like sending a 3 year old to do groceries. You gotta
tell them exactly what you want or you'll end up with a cupboard full of
pop tarts and pancake mix." -- IRC User (http://www.bash.org/?841435)
Mark Wickens
Collective Wisdom,
I'd like to bring email from my current remote hosted IMAP server
in-house. Can anyone provide guidance on solutions? I'd like access from
standard email clients but would also like to be able to ssh into a
local box and read mail via a character terminal.
I have an OpenVMS and Linux server available to serve.
Thanks, Mark.
Mark,
I would go with the Linux platform. As much as I prefer VMS over Linux let's
face it, you will find more support for the Linux platform in this space.
I use a variety of OS platforms to provide email availability and I have found
that either NetBSD or Linux is the easiest to deal with and since you already
have Linux that would be the direction I would suggest.
-Steve
Collective Wisdom,
I'd like to bring email from my current remote hosted IMAP server
in-house. Can anyone provide guidance on solutions? I'd like access from
standard email clients but would also like to be able to ssh into a
local box and read mail via a character terminal.
I have an OpenVMS and Linux server available to serve.
Thanks, Mark.
On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 10:28:29PM +0200, Johnny Billquist wrote:
Yes, but I'm not talking about the TAP interface per se, but of the
bridging function. How does that work... Does it bridge any ethernet
frame, or does it only bridge ip packets...
Ethernet frames.
-brian
--
"Coding in C is like sending a 3 year old to do groceries. You gotta
tell them exactly what you want or you'll end up with a cupboard full of
pop tarts and pancake mix." -- IRC User (http://www.bash.org/?841435)
Brian Hechinger wrote:
On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 09:53:59PM +0200, Johnny Billquist wrote:
Do you have IP addresses set on both TAP interfaces? Does the Solaris
No, the one has an IP, the other (which is the one SIMH talks to) doesn't
as the IP "exists" in VMS, not at the host level.
bridging bridge everything or just ip? If it just bridge ip you might need to have IP addresses on both TAP interfaces for it to be happy. Check all the details you can find on how the bridge stuff works under Solaris.
TAP is the raw ethernet interface, it bridges raw ethernet frames, not IP,
so it *should* just do the right thing. (Like that guy does on linux with it)
That's the theory anyway. :-D
Yes, but I'm not talking about the TAP interface per se, but of the bridging function. How does that work... Does it bridge any ethernet frame, or does it only bridge ip packets...
Johnny
--
Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus
|| on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt at softjar.se || Reading murder books
pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol
On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 09:53:59PM +0200, Johnny Billquist wrote:
Do you have IP addresses set on both TAP interfaces? Does the Solaris
No, the one has an IP, the other (which is the one SIMH talks to) doesn't
as the IP "exists" in VMS, not at the host level.
bridging bridge everything or just ip? If it just bridge ip you might
need to have IP addresses on both TAP interfaces for it to be happy.
Check all the details you can find on how the bridge stuff works under
Solaris.
TAP is the raw ethernet interface, it bridges raw ethernet frames, not IP,
so it *should* just do the right thing. (Like that guy does on linux with it)
That's the theory anyway. :-D
-brian
--
"Coding in C is like sending a 3 year old to do groceries. You gotta
tell them exactly what you want or you'll end up with a cupboard full of
pop tarts and pancake mix." -- IRC User (http://www.bash.org/?841435)
Brian Hechinger wrote:
On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 09:08:45PM +0200, Johnny Billquist wrote:
But in theory, it's not that tricky. You need to know how to do NAT under Solaris, and you need to know how to set up a virtual network (be that with some external program, or if Solaris can bridge interfaces together).
Yeah, which is what I'm attempting to do. I've got two TAP interfaces
bridged together. One SIMH talkes to, the other Solaris has an IP on.
Can't ping back and forth, however. :(
Do you have IP addresses set on both TAP interfaces? Does the Solaris bridging bridge everything or just ip? If it just bridge ip you might need to have IP addresses on both TAP interfaces for it to be happy. Check all the details you can find on how the bridge stuff works under Solaris.
Johnny
--
Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus
|| on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt at softjar.se || Reading murder books
pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol
On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 09:08:45PM +0200, Johnny Billquist wrote:
Ok. So you need a nat-ed "virtual" network, with two interfaces. One for
the Solaris box, and one for the simh. And your Solaris system needs to
nat and route traffic to this virtual network.
Exactly.
I'm not sure if Solaris supports that or not, but perhaps someone else
knows. I haven't played with Solaris in 10 years, so I'm way too rusty
to say anything more specific here. If I had plenty of time, and a
Solaris machine to experiment on, I might be able to do this, but time
and a machine to crash is not something I have around here. :-)
It's changed a bit in the last 10 years as well. :-D
But in theory, it's not that tricky. You need to know how to do NAT
under Solaris, and you need to know how to set up a virtual network (be
that with some external program, or if Solaris can bridge interfaces
together).
Yeah, which is what I'm attempting to do. I've got two TAP interfaces
bridged together. One SIMH talkes to, the other Solaris has an IP on.
Can't ping back and forth, however. :(
-brian
--
"Coding in C is like sending a 3 year old to do groceries. You gotta
tell them exactly what you want or you'll end up with a cupboard full of
pop tarts and pancake mix." -- IRC User (http://www.bash.org/?841435)
Ok. So you need a nat-ed "virtual" network, with two interfaces. One for the Solaris box, and one for the simh. And your Solaris system needs to nat and route traffic to this virtual network.
I'm not sure if Solaris supports that or not, but perhaps someone else knows. I haven't played with Solaris in 10 years, so I'm way too rusty to say anything more specific here. If I had plenty of time, and a Solaris machine to experiment on, I might be able to do this, but time and a machine to crash is not something I have around here. :-)
But in theory, it's not that tricky. You need to know how to do NAT under Solaris, and you need to know how to set up a virtual network (be that with some external program, or if Solaris can bridge interfaces together).
Johnny
Brian Hechinger wrote:
I obviously didn't explain myself very well, so here goes.
I've got a machine running simh. It's only got one ethernet interface on
it.
I need to give it a non-routable IP address so that I can do NAT on the host
that is running simh to give it internet access. So far I've been unable
to make that happen.
This guy did something similar on linux:
http://www.itsecuritygeek.com/itsgeek/comments/simh-networking/
But I can't get that to work for me.
Adding a second physical interface is not an option on this machine. Getting
a second IP is not an option on this machine. Just FYI before anyone
suggests that. :-D
-brian
On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 08:24:53PM +0200, Johnny Billquist wrote:
I suspect "my" bridge program is not involved here, but I might be wrong...
However, I'm not entirely sure what Brian is trying to do.
simh - fine
multinet - fine
two TAP interfaces - between what?
Multinet talks tcp/ip, so if you get simh to talk through *one* tap
interface, you're done. Not sure what the second tap interface is for...
Johnny
Jason Stevens wrote:
The bridge only accepts decnet... If you look through the source, you can see how it sets up the pcap macro_ and expand it to inclde arp,rarp,ip....
-- Sent from my Palm Pr?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Jul 29, 2010 12:59 PM, Brian Hechinger <wonko at 4amlunch.net> wrote:
I was able to get Johnny's bridge to work between my copy of SIMH and
Steve's side using a TAP interface. So far so good.
Now I'm trying to get multinet to be able to talk to the host via the
TAP interfaces. I've setup a second TAP interface, bridged the two
TAP interfaces and set IPs. I cannot ping, however.
I've found stuff on the internet that leads me to believe that this works
correctly on at least Linux, but even doing things pretty much the same
way I am unable to get this to work on Solaris.
While I continue to search the internet looking for help with this, does
anyone have any experience with this sort of setup?
Thanks!
-brian
--
"Coding in C is like sending a 3 year old to do groceries. You gotta
tell them exactly what you want or you'll end up with a cupboard full of
pop tarts and pancake mix." -- IRC User (http://www.bash.org/?841435)
I obviously didn't explain myself very well, so here goes.
I've got a machine running simh. It's only got one ethernet interface on
it.
I need to give it a non-routable IP address so that I can do NAT on the host
that is running simh to give it internet access. So far I've been unable
to make that happen.
This guy did something similar on linux:
http://www.itsecuritygeek.com/itsgeek/comments/simh-networking/
But I can't get that to work for me.
Adding a second physical interface is not an option on this machine. Getting
a second IP is not an option on this machine. Just FYI before anyone
suggests that. :-D
-brian
On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 08:24:53PM +0200, Johnny Billquist wrote:
I suspect "my" bridge program is not involved here, but I might be wrong...
However, I'm not entirely sure what Brian is trying to do.
simh - fine
multinet - fine
two TAP interfaces - between what?
Multinet talks tcp/ip, so if you get simh to talk through *one* tap
interface, you're done. Not sure what the second tap interface is for...
Johnny
Jason Stevens wrote:
The bridge only accepts decnet... If you look through the source, you
can see how it sets up the pcap macro_ and expand it to inclde
arp,rarp,ip....
-- Sent from my Palm Pr?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Jul 29, 2010 12:59 PM, Brian Hechinger <wonko at 4amlunch.net> wrote:
I was able to get Johnny's bridge to work between my copy of SIMH and
Steve's side using a TAP interface. So far so good.
Now I'm trying to get multinet to be able to talk to the host via the
TAP interfaces. I've setup a second TAP interface, bridged the two
TAP interfaces and set IPs. I cannot ping, however.
I've found stuff on the internet that leads me to believe that this works
correctly on at least Linux, but even doing things pretty much the same
way I am unable to get this to work on Solaris.
While I continue to search the internet looking for help with this, does
anyone have any experience with this sort of setup?
Thanks!
-brian
--
"Coding in C is like sending a 3 year old to do groceries. You gotta
tell them exactly what you want or you'll end up with a cupboard full of
pop tarts and pancake mix." -- IRC User (http://www.bash.org/?841435)
--
"Coding in C is like sending a 3 year old to do groceries. You gotta
tell them exactly what you want or you'll end up with a cupboard full of
pop tarts and pancake mix." -- IRC User (http://www.bash.org/?841435)
