[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]

UpDate:,,, Some Success, Server appears up, with one problem..



Hello TOR people, Yay! I did finally get server up, but all is not completely good: Anyone interested please note log entries.Thanks for advice and support.
I hope to have it working perfectly soon. Am not sure exactly what to think of entries below:
*****************************************
Oct 29 03:31:32.969 [Notice] Tor v0.2.0.7-alpha (r11572). This is experimental software. Do not rely on it for strong anonymity. (Running on Linux i686)
Oct 29 03:31:32.975 [Notice] Initialized libevent version 1.1a using method epoll. Good.
Oct 29 03:31:32.979 [Notice] Opening OR listener on 0.0.0.0:9001
Oct 29 03:31:33.131 [Notice] Opening Directory listener on 0.0.0.0:9030
Oct 29 03:31:33.138 [Notice] Opening Socks listener on 127.0.0.1:9050
Oct 29 03:31:33.142 [Notice] Opening Control listener on 127.0.0.1:9051
Oct 29 03:31:46.978 [Notice] Tor has successfully opened a circuit. Looks like client functionality is working.
Oct 29 03:32:19.088 [Notice] Self-testing indicates your DirPort is reachable from the outside. Excellent.
Oct 29 03:32:45.443 [Notice] Performing bandwidth self-test...done.
Oct 29 03:33:41.789 [Warning] eventdns: All nameservers have failed
Oct 29 03:33:41.872 [Notice] eventdns: Nameserver 68.87.69.146 is back up
Oct 29 03:33:46.790 [Warning] eventdns: All nameservers have failed
Oct 29 03:33:46.856 [Notice] eventdns: Nameserver 68.87.69.146 is back up
************************************************

  I can see from the Bandwith Graph that some traffic does flow through, though not a lot.  Is this normal? Is it OK that I get a "nameserver" error and how can that problem be solved?? The listed back up is my normal DNS at comcast.
                                                                                            Algenon

algenon flower <algenon_flower@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hello Pei Hanru, experienced TOR users
  I have checked Linksys doc's and I think they were helpful. At present, I think I need to assign a static IP to my RHEL system behind NAT firewall. That seems to include two extra assigned IP numbers, like 196.168.1.20, Then I can use port forwarding set-up on NAT router. I bet this is elementary school for many of you, it took a little while for me :),,  All I need now is the procedure to assign a static IP on RHEL. I am checking that now,, And, Hope it all Works! In any case, thanks to people interested, and additional comments welcome.
                                                            peace, Algenon

Pei Hanru <peihanru@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 2007-10-27 06:23 CST, algenon flower wrote:
> Hello Michael Holstein and other interested people
> I thought I had accomplished port forwarding (see attached file) but
> did not succeed. After checking with Linksys support site I am going to
> try a new apporach. Will study the doc's from Linksys, if anyone has
> experience with this please let me know.
> Algenon

Unfortunately, you are doing worse...

What you should do is first figuring out the *actual* private IP address
of your Linux box, then forwarding port 9001 and port 9030 (or port
range 9001-9030 if you like) to *that* address, rather than forwarding
the same port range to three distinct addresses.

It's a good idea to reread port forwarding part of Linksys manual carefully.

Hanru
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Cygwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFHJDrrtHG285r2MGoRAvAJAKDLRHZYc/5ZRXeNgaIXnZHUr/2zXgCeOqji
h67261xOLOYdjvEyADPndks=
=EmPN
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com