Date: Sun, 4 Jun 00 18:52:48 EST From: Dwight McKay (The Moderator) Reply-To: Suns-at-Home@net-kitchen.com Subject: Suns-at-Home Digest V13 #17 To: Suns-at-Home-List Suns-at-Home Digest Sun, 4 Jun 00 Volume 13 : Issue 17 Today's Topics: 411 case A PC Hard disk an Ultra 5? asppp inactivity timer FW: asppp inactivity timer how to disconnect idle users automatically. IP tunneling? Revisions regarding Ultra machines... Suns-at-Home Digest V13 #16 (3 msgs) +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Submissions: suns-at-home@net-kitchen.com | | Requests: suns-at-home-request@net-kitchen.com | | WWW Archive access: http://www.net-kitchen.com/~sah | +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2000 19:37:40 -0400 From: Pat and Jake Brodersen Subject: 411 case To: Sun at Home This is probably a silly question, but how do you get a 411 case open. I have two that I can't open. It looks like the top cover is supposed to slide backwards to expose the insides, but I can't get it to move. I've already snapped off two of the small alignment (?) pins near the bottom. Fragile little suckers.... Help please... Jake - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 May 2000 22:06:06 -0500 From: "Derrik Walker v2.0" Subject: A PC Hard disk an Ultra 5? To: I am wandering if I can yank the 8 gig IDE disk from a Ultra 5 and a 20 Gig PC disk in? Will I be able to install Solaris 8 on it? Will the Ultra 5 firmware recognize it ok? Thanks. -Derrik mailto:firebug@apk.net http://junior.apk.net/~firebug ------------------------------ TCP/IP is OK if you've got a little informal club, and it doesn't make any difference if it takes a while to fix it. -- Ken Olson, in Digital News, 1988 - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 May 2000 12:10:46 -0400 From: "Fisch, Eric" Subject: asppp inactivity timer To: suns-at-home@net-kitchen.com I have almost finished setting up my SS5/Solaris 7 box to ppp dial-on-demand to my ISP. I have one remaining issue that I need assistance resolving. My ISP broadcasts a message to x.0.0.1 every thirty seconds or so. This has resulted in my connection remaining active and never timing out (asppp.cf has inactivity timer set to 600 seconds). I installed ip-firewall/NAT package and successfully "block" the traffic, but that apparently occurs after the timer is reset. Any ideas how I can modify the system to ignore this traffic when counting inactivity? Thanks, Eric Fisch efisch@kpmg.com ***************************************************************************** The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this email by anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful. When addressed to our clients any opinions or advice contained in this email are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in the governing KPMG client engagement letter. ***************************************************************************** - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 May 2000 12:30:15 -0400 From: "Fisch, Eric" Subject: FW: asppp inactivity timer To: suns-at-home@net-kitchen.com The packets look like the are being sent to 224.0.0.1 (multicast?!). Any idea why an ISP would do that? Eric - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 May 2000 14:20:05 +0100 From: David Richerby Subject: how to disconnect idle users automatically. To: suns-at-home@net-kitchen.com Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 07:49:01 -0700 (PDT) From: sunthar resar Subject: how to disconnect idle users automatically. To: Suns-at-Home-Request@net-kitchen.com sunthar resar wrote: > Please help me to figureout how to disconnect > the users who are idle for more than one hour > automatically. There's a program called idled which does this, written by Michael P. Crider. Its home page doesn't seem to exist any more but you can download the source from Debian or SuSE Linux (probably a number of other places, too) and compile it yourself. Try, for example: ftp://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/dists/stable/non-free/ source/admin/idled_1.16.orig.tar.gz Dave. - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 May 2000 15:49:19 +0100 From: Mike Dent Subject: IP tunneling? To: Suns-at-Home-List@tigger.net-kitchen.com Hi folks, does anybody know if Solaris 8 supports IP in IP tunneling yet? Thanks Mike - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 May 2000 22:51:53 -0400 From: "Ken Hansen" Subject: Revisions regarding Ultra machines... To: I noticed in the last digest there were several posts regarding relative = perofrmance of several machines (the SPARC line in toto?), but the Ultra info looked = a bit wrong (IMHO)... The Ultra 2 can take up to 2 400 Megahertz UltraSPARC CPUs, and as = such it could be argued as more *robust* than an Ultra 5 or Ultra 10... I = say this because I just ordered an Ultra 2 w/ 2x300 Mhz CPUS w/2 meg L2 cache, 256 = Meg RAM and 21" monitor w/ Creator graphics (UPA attached) and a 4 Gig HD - = $3000. I was going to get the Ultra 5 on student special, but was advised = that if I could swing it, the Ultra 2 would yield *much* better performance in = almost all cases, and with a 360 Mhz CPU w/256K L2 cache was not half the machine the = Ultra 2 is (literally). Also, the speculation is that the Ultra 2, being = SBUS and more expandable would hold it's value much longer. The Ultra 5 special is $1295 for = a 360 Mhz CPU w/256K cache, 128 Meg RAM, 18 Gig IDE HD and PCI graphics (32 = bit) with 17" monitor. To up the RAM, cut over to SCSI and upgrade to a = 21" display would take the price of the Ultra 5 *close* to the Ultra 2, and the = performance would be lower, much lower (cache diff., 1 vs. 2 CPU, basic design)... Sorry, I just felt the need to share the above, I would appreciate = corrections if I am wrong on facts, opinions will vary... Thanks, Ken n2vip@bellatlantic.net - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 May 2000 10:57:26 -0400 From: Erik Fichtner Subject: Suns-at-Home Digest V13 #16 To: Dwight McKay > Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 21:22:19 -0700 > From: Bradford Castalia > Subject: how to disconnect idle users automatically. > To: sunthar resar > > > - ------------------------------ > > Please help me to figureout how to disconnect > > the users who are idle for more than one hour > > automatically. > > > Set the users login shell to tcsh and configure it appropriately > See the (long) tcsh man page for particulars. A better solution is to install a package like idled. http://www.darkwing.com/idled/ In addition to kicking users off that have been idle too long, it can also kick off people who have been on the system for too long, or enforce login policies such as "one login per user". It is configurable to specific uids, gids, terminal lines, etc. Very nice. -- Erik Fichtner; Warrior SysAdmin http://www.obfuscation.org/techs/ "The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable." -- George Bernard Shaw - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 May 2000 10:58:56 -0400 From: "Sheldon T. Hall" Subject: Suns-at-Home Digest V13 #16 To: "'Suns-at-Home@net-kitchen.com'" On Sunday, May 28, 2000 8:43 PM, Garry Garrett [I think] wrote: [snip] > > Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 16:59:02 -0400 > > From: "Gordon, John" > > Subject: Sun Sparc reference ? > > To: "'suns-at-home@net-kitchen.com'" > > > > I was looking for a good used Sun machine to use at home, but am having > > trouble finding any kind of reference on the net that tells me how to > > compare whats out there ... what the hardware progression is through the > > various system names that are for sale (sparc 1, 2, 5, classic, ultra, ss10, > > ss20, ilx?, epc?, etc), framebuffers (tx1 vs cg6, etc), whats a good idprom > > and should i care ?, which ones have room in the case for an add-on internal > > CD drive ?, and the like. There are lots of hardware guides for the PC, but > > none I can find for the Sun. The one I did find has a bad link (Birdsall?). > > I copy of Birdsall's (Sp?) wonderful FAQ can be found at > http://www.sunhelp.org/ where you will also find some > framebuffer FAQs, etc. > > In terms of power, (this is from memory, check an FAQ to be sure): > > SLC/IPC > ELC/IPX/SPARC1/SPARC1+ > SPARCclassic/LX/SPARC2 > SPARC4/SPARC5 > SPARC10/SPARC20 > SPARC1000/SPARC2000 > Ultra1 > Ultra2 > Ultra5/Ultra10 > Ultra250 > Ultra450/420/440 > Ultra3000/3500 > Ultra4000/4500 > Ultra5000/5500 > Ultra6000/6500 > Ultra10000 > > Ones that are on the same line are around the same firepower. > Where there are multiple machines on the same line, the ones > on the left generally have less room for expansion, are less > upgradable, etc. > > Generally speaking, when it comes to frame buffers, cgN, > the higher the N, the better the graphics. A GX buffer > is approximately equivalent to a cg6. TGX (Turbo GX) I > think is faster (I'm not real sure). It gets fuzzy for > me above that (Creator 3D, etc.), particluarly the new > PCI stuff (PGX-32?). I've never been in an environment > that called for anything that high powered (CAD/CAM, etc.). That's a pretty good thumbnail ranking! If I may, I'd like to add a few things about the low end machines: The SLC/IPC/ELC/IPX/SPARC1/SPARC1+/SPARCstation2 aren't supported by Solaris 8. An IPX is more directly competitive with an SS2 than an SS1; it's the same processor and the same bus speed. The SS2 does have more hardware contexts than the IPX, and will take 2 internal disk drives vs. the IPX's one, but the SS2's pizza-box footprint is much, much larger than the IPX's "lunchbox." Both the SS2 and the IPX will take the Weitek "PowerUp" processor, which doubles the processor speed (to 80 Mhz). This is good for CPU-bound tasks, but doesn't do much for anything else. The LX and Classic lunchboxes have the same architecture and speed (50 Mhz), but the LX has better graphics capabilities. There's also a "Classic-X;" it was designed to be used strictly as an X terminal, but a small configuration hack to the NVRAM will turn it into a real computer. All three will take 128 MB of RAM, although the Sun spec is 96 MB. They take real-parity PC RAM, too, which is cheaper than the special RAM for the SS5-and-up. All the lunchboxes (IPC/IPX/LX/Classic) have built-in video. The LX also has built-in ISDN. The lower-end pizza-boxes (i.e. up to SS5) usually don't have built-in video, but do have room for 2 drives (except the SS4, maybe). The pizza-boxes generally also have room for 3 SBUS cards, vs. 2 for the lunchboxes. All the low-end machines have mediocre serial-port support; 38,400 kbps is about the best you can expect out of the built-in serial ports. This really limits their use with modern, fast modems. All the above is IIRC, AFAIK, and IMHO, of course. I think the LX packs amazing punch for its physical size, and I've been very happy with mine. Judging from prices I see for what I consider to be the more desirable low-end machines, the bargains are the LX and the SS5/110. SS5/170s are as expensive as Ultra 1s, but the SS5/110s are usually hardly any more than SS5/70s. Any of them, in "bare" configuration (no mem, no disk) are very inexpensive. Get one. You can hardly go wrong. -Shel - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 May 2000 11:03:48 -0400 From: John DiMarco Subject: Suns-at-Home Digest V13 #16 To: Suns-at-Home@net-kitchen.com In message <200005290046.TAA23000@tigger.net-kitchen.com> Garry Garrett writes: >In terms of power, (this is from memory, check an FAQ to be sure): > >SLC/IPC >ELC/IPX/SPARC1/SPARC1+ >SPARCclassic/LX/SPARC2 >SPARC4/SPARC5 >SPARC10/SPARC20 >SPARC1000/SPARC2000 >Ultra1 >Ultra2 >Ultra5/Ultra10 >Ultra250 >Ultra450/420/440 >Ultra3000/3500 >Ultra4000/4500 >Ultra5000/5500 >Ultra6000/6500 >Ultra10000 > >Ones that are on the same line are around the same firepower. >Where there are multiple machines on the same line, the ones >on the left generally have less room for expansion, are less >upgradable, etc. Here's a somewhat better list for non-Ultra SPARC systems, roughly ordered by increasing integer performance. For UltraSPARC systems, performance roughly follows the clock speed of the processors, with some modest correction for cache size. 4/110,4/150 4/260,4/280 SLC,SS1 SS1+,IPC,4/3xx ELC,4/4xx SS2,IPX,Classic,LX,4/6xx-120/140 SS10-20,SS2/IPX-PowerUp SS10-30,SS4/5-70 SS10-40,SS10-41,SS4/5-85,SC2000-40 SS20-50,SS4/5-110,SS10/20/6xx-51,SS1000-50,SC2000-50 SS20-61,SS20-HS11,SS1000E-60,SC2000E-60,CS6400-60 SS20-71,SS20-HS21 SS5-170,SS1000E-85,SC2000E-85,CS6400-85 SS20-151 Regards, John -- John DiMarco Office: SF2101 CSLab Systems Manager Phone: 416-978-5300 University of Toronto Fax: 416-978-1931 http://www.cs.toronto.edu/~jdd - ------------------------------ End of Suns-at-Home Digest ******************************