While booting my brand new 11.0 system on the brand new box, I get this
message:

dnsmasq: failed to create listening socket: Address already in use

and I have no idea what it means. I'm pretty sure this is the first
release that I've ever even heard of such a thing - didn't it used to be
iptables?

Anyway, on the new box, which I'll call "new box", eth0 plugs into the
LAN, and I've got the lab box ("lab box") connected to eth1, with DHCP
working between the two. They can ping each other, and the one on the LAN
(the new box) can ping everything (including the other one on eth1, the
lab box), but the lab box can ping both the new box's eth0 and eth1,
but not the LAN box that the new box is connected to, on its own
DHCP addy.

OK, the LAN box presents 10.0.0.1 as the gateway.
The new box gets a DHCP addy of 10.0.0.183 .
New box eth1 = 10.1.0.1, DHCPD range 10.1.0.100-200
Lab box gets DHCPCD addy 10.1.0.200

and 10.1.0.200 can ping 10.1.0.1, and it can ping 10.0.0.183, but
a ping to 10.0.0.1 doesn't get answered.

I presume dnsmasq has something to do with that, but that's a change
from what I remember from 10.

Where should I look for instructions for this? I know, RTFM, but
_WHICH_ FM? I know of the Masquerading_Simple_HOWTO, but I'd like
to have everything running properly first, like, what's dnsmasq, and
what's it supposed to be doing, and how do I troubleshoot it, and
all that?

Is there a set of HOWTOs out there which have been updated to the
current century? ;-)

Thanks,
Rich

Rich Grise wrote:
> While booting my brand new 11.0 system on the brand new box, I get this
> message:
>
> dnsmasq: failed to create listening socket: Address already in use
>
> and I have no idea what it means. I'm pretty sure this is the first
> release that I've ever even heard of such a thing - didn't it used to be
> iptables?

I certainly isn't new to slack 11.

Here on a slack 10.2:

kees@pcict9:~$ locate dnsmasq
/var/log/packages/dnsmasq-2.23-i486-1
/var/log/scripts/dnsmasq-2.23-i486-1
/var/log/removed_packages/dnsmasq-2.8-i486-1-upgraded-2005-02-16,19:55:05
/var/log/removed_packages/dnsmasq-2.20-i486-1-upgraded-2005-07-26,12:48:37
/var/log/removed_packages/dnsmasq-2.22-i486-1-upgraded-2005-09-29,19:14:58
/var/log/removed_scripts/dnsmasq-2.8-i486-1-upgraded-2005-02-16,19:55:05
/var/log/removed_scripts/dnsmasq-2.20-i486-1-upgraded-2005-07-26,12:48:37
/var/log/removed_scripts/dnsmasq-2.22-i486-1-upgraded-2005-09-29,19:14:58
/var/state/dnsmasq
/usr/man/man8/dnsmasq.8.gz
/usr/doc/dnsmasq-2.23
/usr/doc/dnsmasq-2.23/FAQ
/usr/doc/dnsmasq-2.23/CHANGELOG
/usr/doc/dnsmasq-2.23/UPGRADING_to_2.0
/usr/doc/dnsmasq-2.23/setup.html
/usr/doc/dnsmasq-2.23/doc.html
/usr/doc/dnsmasq-2.23/COPYING
/usr/sbin/dnsmasq
/etc/rc.d/rc.dnsmasq
/etc/dnsmasq.conf

and:

kees@pcict9:~$ cat /var/log/packages/dnsmasq-2.23-i486-1
PACKAGE NAME: dnsmasq-2.23-i486-1
COMPRESSED PACKAGE SIZE: 108 K
UNCOMPRESSED PACKAGE SIZE: 250 K
PACKAGE LOCATION: n/dnsmasq-2.23-i486-1.tgz
PACKAGE DESCRIPTION:
dnsmasq: dnsmasq (small DNS and DHCP server)
dnsmasq:
dnsmasq: Dnsmasq is a lightweight, easy to configure DNS forwarder and DHCP
dnsmasq: server. It is designed to provide DNS (and optionally DHCP) to a
dnsmasq: small network, and can serve the names of local machines which
are not
dnsmasq: in the global DNS.
dnsmasq:
dnsmasq: Dnsmasq was written by Simon Kelley.
dnsmasq:
dnsmasq:
dnsmasq:
[ snip ]


Looks like you'r trying to start two different nameservers or dhcp
servers.

Kees.

--
Kees Theunissen.

Rich Grise wrote:

> Where should I look for instructions for this? I know, RTFM, but
> _WHICH_ FM? I know of the Masquerading_Simple_HOWTO, but I'd like
> to have everything running properly first, like, what's dnsmasq, and
> what's it supposed to be doing, and how do I troubleshoot it, and
> all that?

Man dnsmasq. It's a small daemon that does the job of bind and dhcpd. Very
easy and nice for small private networks. It's started from rc.M if
rc.dnsmasq is executable.

--
Old Man

"I could be wrong again
I remember once in August 1993
I was wrong, and I could be wrong again" - Paul Simon

Old Man wrote:


> Man dnsmasq. It's a small daemon that does the job of bind and dhcpd.
> Very
> easy and nice for small private networks. It's started from rc.M if
> rc.dnsmasq is executable.
>

Should have also mentioned there are very straightforward docs, and links to
articles, in /usr/doc/dnsmasq-2.33 (if you're interested in using dnsmasq).

--
Old Man

"I could be wrong again
I remember once in August 1993
I was wrong, and I could be wrong again" - Paul Simon

You have to resolve dependencies using something like slapt-get. If the
RPM doesn't work then you can recompile the kernel and use bcn to
update the library list. Otherwise you need to add /usr/bin/hyttm to
the path and check the syslog to see if there's any activity relating
to eth0 or eth1.

hth

s.
--
Homepage: http://web.archive.org/web/199901281...ml.net/~mozes/
The Biscuit Appreciation Society : www.biscuit.org.uk
Experimental ARM Linux distribution: www.armedslack.org
| "Washing machines live longer with Calgon"

On Tue, 31 Oct 2006 22:22:18 -0800, Stuart Winter wrote:

> You have to resolve dependencies using something like slapt-get. If the
> RPM doesn't work then you can recompile the kernel and use bcn to
> update the library list. Otherwise you need to add /usr/bin/hyttm to
> the path and check the syslog to see if there's any activity relating
> to eth0 or eth1.

There were no RPMs involved - this is a fresh install, with newly
formatted HDs, straight from the ISO CDs.

But thanks for offering your help.

Thanks,
Rich

On Tue, 31 Oct 2006 22:59:16 -0500, Old Man wrote:

> Old Man wrote:
>
>> Man dnsmasq. It's a small daemon that does the job of bind and dhcpd.
>> Very
>> easy and nice for small private networks. It's started from rc.M if
>> rc.dnsmasq is executable.
>
> Should have also mentioned there are very straightforward docs, and links to
> articles, in /usr/doc/dnsmasq-2.33 (if you're interested in using dnsmasq).

Actually, I'm "interested" in using whatever Patrick recommends, since
he's so much better at getting this stuff right than I am.

But I will be perusing man dnsmasq.

Thanks,
Rich

On Wed, 01 Nov 2006 02:39:08 +0100, Kees Theunissen wrote:
> Rich Grise wrote:
>> While booting my brand new 11.0 system on the brand new box, I get this
>> message:
>>
>> dnsmasq: failed to create listening socket: Address already in use
>>
>> and I have no idea what it means. I'm pretty sure this is the first
>> release that I've ever even heard of such a thing - didn't it used to be
>> iptables?
>
> I certainly isn't new to slack 11.
>
> Here on a slack 10.2:
>
> [ snip example]
>
> Looks like you'r trying to start two different nameservers or dhcp
> servers.
>

Thanks for this!

But, I've never used dnsmasq before - I've always (9.0, 9.1, 10.0, 10.2)
copied the "IP Masquerading" script from the HOWTO, which invokes iptables.

Guess I might have to back up a little and do some more RTFM here. :-)

Thanks!
Rich

On Wed, 01 Nov 2006 02:39:08 +0100, Kees Theunissen wrote:
> Rich Grise wrote:
>> While booting my brand new 11.0 system on the brand new box, I get this
>> message:
>>
>> dnsmasq: failed to create listening socket: Address already in use
....
> Looks like you'r trying to start two different nameservers or dhcp
> servers.

Yes, it looks like that to me, too, but I don't know how to resolve it,
yet.

Would dhcpcd or rc.inet1.conf have anything to do with that "already in
use" stuff? How do I find out _which_ address is already in use? Is
that somewhere in the comments in the default dnsmasq.conf? (which I've
only started delving into less than an hour ago, but I'm impatient with
myself).

Thanks,
Rich

On 2006-11-01, Rich Grise <rich@example.net> wrote:

> But I will be perusing man dnsmasq.

You might rather peruse the setup and doc files in your system from
your browser:

file:///usr/doc/dnsmasq-2.20/doc.html
file:///usr/doc/dnsmasq-2.20/setup.html

Also, I don't get your network at all. You say:

"Anyway, on the new box, which I'll call "new box", eth0 plugs into the
LAN, and I've got the lab box ("lab box") connected to eth1, with DHCP
working between the two."

Just what is your LAN? A network behind a router? And you say the "lab box"
is connected to eth1, right? Is that eth1 of the "new box"? If so, this
means "lab box" is not connected directly to your LAN and "new box" is
the gateway between your LAN and "lab box", right? Or, am I missing
something?

I'll stop here and let you reply. I'm already confused enough.

nb