From chris at webperformance.com Mon Jul 21 14:16:27 2014 From: chris at webperformance.com (Chris Merrill) Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2014 14:16:27 -0400 Subject: [TriLUG] location-specific SMTP problem Message-ID: <53CD58FB.1080708@webperformance.com> One of my co-workers has problems connecting to our SMTP server from his house. The same Mac laptop works fine at work and most other locations. At home he's on UVerse with an Apple router. If he turns on the hotspot on his Verizon phone, he can connect and send mail. Turn it back off and go through AT&T - fail. Our office is on TWC BC -- no problems. He can connect to other SMTP servers (GMail) without a problem. He also reports that at certain WiFi spots, he encounters the same problem. He does not know if those spots use AT&T or an Apple router. I've asked him to run a traceroute next time he is on a Wifi spot that fails - to determine if the spot is running through the AT&T network. I connect on port 25 using STARTTLS using Thunderbird, also via AT&T Uverse and have no problems. This seems to narrow down the problem to a combination of our server and either AT&T Uverse or Apple routers. Our server is running dovecot 2.0.9 on Linux 2.6.32-431.17.1.el6.x86_64 (RHEL, I think). I've surpassed the extent of my knowledge and it's looking like a long deep hole of troubleshooting ahead :( Any ideas where I should start looking? I'm thinking I'm going to need to capture the network traffic on his box during an authentication session and dig into the specific messages sent/ received. But I don't really know what I'll be looking for. TIA! Chris -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ - Chris Merrill | Web Performance, Inc. chris at webperformance.com | http://webperformance.com 919-433-1762 | 919-845-7601 Web Performance: Website Load Testing Software & Services ------------------------------------------------------------------------ - From matt at noway2.thruhere.net Mon Jul 21 14:49:42 2014 From: matt at noway2.thruhere.net (matt at noway2.thruhere.net) Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2014 14:49:42 -0400 Subject: [TriLUG] location-specific SMTP problem In-Reply-To: <53CD58FB.1080708@webperformance.com> References: <53CD58FB.1080708@webperformance.com> Message-ID: <576dffce4cea0e027f71c5fd9c170a52.squirrel@www.noway2.net> My initial thought is that the ISP is blocking email traffic except to known white listed servers. Running traceroute, along with NMAP and possibly trying to establish some telnet sessions should answer this. Mentioning the apple products and TLS jumped out at me. I know from experience, e.g. an IPAD Apple doesn't follow the standards for TLS and port 25 and instead prefers to use the submission port or SSL. I had a lot of trouble getting the IPAD to work with Postfix - Dovecot based email server. I would also recommend doing some DNS tests, such as running NSLookup and trying to retrieve the MX records. Make sure that this isn't causing problems. Speaking of DNS, make sure you don't have a dud resolution occurring (e.g. poisoned cache or simple error). The fact that it seems to be provider specific really suggests to me that something is being filtered. If you can coordinate have him try to connect and see if anything shows up on the server logs at the same time. Ultimately, this is how I came to identify the issue with Apple products and email protocols. > One of my co-workers has problems connecting to our SMTP server from > his house. The same Mac laptop works fine at work and most other > locations. > > At home he's on UVerse with an Apple router. If he turns on the hotspot > on his Verizon phone, he can connect and send mail. Turn it back off and > go through AT&T - fail. Our office is on TWC BC -- no problems. > > He can connect to other SMTP servers (GMail) without a problem. He also > reports that at certain WiFi spots, he encounters the same problem. He > does not know if those spots use AT&T or an Apple router. I've asked him > to run a traceroute next time he is on a Wifi spot that fails - to > determine if the spot is running through the AT&T network. > > I connect on port 25 using STARTTLS using Thunderbird, also via AT&T > Uverse > and have no problems. > > This seems to narrow down the problem to a combination of our server > and either AT&T Uverse or Apple routers. > > Our server is running dovecot 2.0.9 on Linux 2.6.32-431.17.1.el6.x86_64 > (RHEL, I think). > > > I've surpassed the extent of my knowledge and it's looking like a > long deep hole of troubleshooting ahead :( > > Any ideas where I should start looking? > > I'm thinking I'm going to need to capture the network traffic on his box > during an authentication session and dig into the specific messages sent/ > received. But I don't really know what I'll be looking for. > > TIA! > Chris > > -- > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ - > Chris Merrill | Web Performance, Inc. > chris at webperformance.com | http://webperformance.com > 919-433-1762 | 919-845-7601 > > Web Performance: Website Load Testing Software & Services > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ - > -- > This message was sent to: Matt Flyer > To unsubscribe, send a blank message to trilug-leave at trilug.org from that > address. > TriLUG mailing list : http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug > Unsubscribe or edit options on the web : > http://www.trilug.org/mailman/options/trilug/matt%40noway2.thruhere.net > Welcome to TriLUG: http://trilug.org/welcome > From jon at jmainguy.com Mon Jul 21 14:52:02 2014 From: jon at jmainguy.com (Jonathan Mainguy) Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2014 14:52:02 -0400 Subject: [TriLUG] location-specific SMTP problem In-Reply-To: <576dffce4cea0e027f71c5fd9c170a52.squirrel@www.noway2.net> References: <53CD58FB.1080708@webperformance.com> <576dffce4cea0e027f71c5fd9c170a52.squirrel@www.noway2.net> Message-ID: my wife uses AT&T at work and cannot send mail, pretty sure its AT&T limiting traffic outbound on port 25. If she jumps on the VPN from work, then all of a sudden email works again. I told her to call AT&T and get it straightened out, but she has the VPN as a workaround so she has not bothered. On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 2:49 PM, wrote: > My initial thought is that the ISP is blocking email traffic except to > known white listed servers. Running traceroute, along with NMAP and > possibly trying to establish some telnet sessions should answer this. > > Mentioning the apple products and TLS jumped out at me. I know from > experience, e.g. an IPAD Apple doesn't follow the standards for TLS and > port 25 and instead prefers to use the submission port or SSL. I had a > lot of trouble getting the IPAD to work with Postfix - Dovecot based email > server. > > I would also recommend doing some DNS tests, such as running NSLookup and > trying to retrieve the MX records. Make sure that this isn't causing > problems. Speaking of DNS, make sure you don't have a dud resolution > occurring (e.g. poisoned cache or simple error). > > The fact that it seems to be provider specific really suggests to me that > something is being filtered. > > If you can coordinate have him try to connect and see if anything shows up > on the server logs at the same time. Ultimately, this is how I came to > identify the issue with Apple products and email protocols. > > > > One of my co-workers has problems connecting to our SMTP server from > > his house. The same Mac laptop works fine at work and most other > > locations. > > > > At home he's on UVerse with an Apple router. If he turns on the hotspot > > on his Verizon phone, he can connect and send mail. Turn it back off and > > go through AT&T - fail. Our office is on TWC BC -- no problems. > > > > He can connect to other SMTP servers (GMail) without a problem. He also > > reports that at certain WiFi spots, he encounters the same problem. He > > does not know if those spots use AT&T or an Apple router. I've asked him > > to run a traceroute next time he is on a Wifi spot that fails - to > > determine if the spot is running through the AT&T network. > > > > I connect on port 25 using STARTTLS using Thunderbird, also via AT&T > > Uverse > > and have no problems. > > > > This seems to narrow down the problem to a combination of our server > > and either AT&T Uverse or Apple routers. > > > > Our server is running dovecot 2.0.9 on Linux 2.6.32-431.17.1.el6.x86_64 > > (RHEL, I think). > > > > > > I've surpassed the extent of my knowledge and it's looking like a > > long deep hole of troubleshooting ahead :( > > > > Any ideas where I should start looking? > > > > I'm thinking I'm going to need to capture the network traffic on his box > > during an authentication session and dig into the specific messages sent/ > > received. But I don't really know what I'll be looking for. > > > > TIA! > > Chris > > > > -- > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > - > > Chris Merrill | Web Performance, Inc. > > chris at webperformance.com | http://webperformance.com > > 919-433-1762 | 919-845-7601 > > > > Web Performance: Website Load Testing Software & Services > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > - > > -- > > This message was sent to: Matt Flyer > > To unsubscribe, send a blank message to trilug-leave at trilug.org from > that > > address. > > TriLUG mailing list : http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug > > Unsubscribe or edit options on the web : > > http://www.trilug.org/mailman/options/trilug/matt%40noway2.thruhere.net > > Welcome to TriLUG: http://trilug.org/welcome > > > > -- > This message was sent to: Jon Mainguy > To unsubscribe, send a blank message to trilug-leave at trilug.org from that > address. > TriLUG mailing list : http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug > Unsubscribe or edit options on the web : > http://www.trilug.org/mailman/options/trilug/jon%40jmainguy.com > Welcome to TriLUG: http://trilug.org/welcome > From bill at arrowsreach.com Mon Jul 21 15:11:41 2014 From: bill at arrowsreach.com (Bill Farrow) Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2014 15:11:41 -0400 Subject: [TriLUG] location-specific SMTP problem In-Reply-To: References: <53CD58FB.1080708@webperformance.com> <576dffce4cea0e027f71c5fd9c170a52.squirrel@www.noway2.net> Message-ID: It is most likely AT&T blocking port 25 to prevent SPAM. Could you enable the SMTP server to listen on another port as well as 25 and get your co-worker to use the new port number instead. Bill From at at pirate96.com Mon Jul 21 15:27:33 2014 From: at at pirate96.com (Aaron Thomas) Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2014 15:27:33 -0400 Subject: [TriLUG] location-specific SMTP problem In-Reply-To: References: <53CD58FB.1080708@webperformance.com> <576dffce4cea0e027f71c5fd9c170a52.squirrel@www.noway2.net> Message-ID: <1405970853.7984.4.camel@cypress.wokokon.com> Hello, On Mon, 2014-07-21 at 15:11 -0400, Bill Farrow wrote: > It is most likely AT&T blocking port 25 to prevent SPAM. > > Could you enable the SMTP server to listen on another port as well as > 25 and get your co-worker to use the new port number instead. My bet is that on the co-workers route AT&T is blocking connections to the IP Address your server is listening on. They seem to block first and ask questions later after a lot of pain in getting them to respond. I would start with an MTR to your smtp server from the co-workers home. mtr --report --report-cycles=100 Hope this helps! From chris at webperformance.com Mon Jul 21 16:06:13 2014 From: chris at webperformance.com (Chris Merrill) Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2014 16:06:13 -0400 Subject: [TriLUG] location-specific SMTP problem In-Reply-To: References: <53CD58FB.1080708@webperformance.com> <576dffce4cea0e027f71c5fd9c170a52.squirrel@www.noway2.net> Message-ID: <53CD72B5.7040105@webperformance.com> I mentioned that he said can send via other SMTP mail servers on port 25. Therefore, I had ruled out port 25 blocking. But I went back to double check his settings, and they were NOT configured to use port 25 as he reported. They were set to "Default (25, 465, 587)"! I told him to go home and force his mail client to send email via the other server (GMail) using port 25. If it fails with that other server on 25, then we will have found the problem. I'll report back tomorrow :) Thanks! Chris On 7/21/2014 3:11 PM, Bill Farrow wrote: > It is most likely AT&T blocking port 25 to prevent SPAM. > > Could you enable the SMTP server to listen on another port as well as > 25 and get your co-worker to use the new port number instead. > > Bill > -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ - Chris Merrill | Web Performance, Inc. chris at webperformance.com | http://webperformance.com 919-433-1762 | 919-845-7601 Web Performance: Website Load Testing Software & Services ------------------------------------------------------------------------ - From plug at hyltown.com Tue Jul 22 22:18:32 2014 From: plug at hyltown.com (Dewey Hylton) Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2014 22:18:32 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [TriLUG] troubleshooting spotty internet connectivity with TWCBC In-Reply-To: <1128464859.17307.1406081320787.JavaMail.root@mail> Message-ID: <123534544.17347.1406081912814.JavaMail.root@mail> hi all, just wanting a sanity check here. i have a customer paying for TWC Business Class service. they run a small shop (~20 computers) behind a *nix firewall, and have been running this basic configuration for over a decade. no interesting changes in the last couple of months. friday, they called and said they had issues getting to several external websites that they use daily. i remoted a desktop, looked up the dns record, captured packets on the external interface of the firewall relating to that address, and tried hitting the site with a browser. i saw outbound syn packets, but nothing in return. i duplicated the test for another of their problematic sites and had the same result. plenty of other sites worked fine. they had issues with several sites, but the only two i tested were www.ups.com and mail.yahoo.com. we've flushed internal dns cache, double-checked dns records against google's cache (8.8.8.8), but stands out to me. i called TWCBC support. the first tech tried "accessing those 2 sites via the cable modem" and failed. so, believing the problem was on their end, he escalated the ticket. but the second level tech refuses to work with me until i've connected a computer directly to the cable modem. does this make sense to anyone? the firewall _is_ a computer, and is much more capable of network testing and such than any of their windows desktops or servers. and it is directly connected to the cable modem already. am i missing some bit of logic somewhere? From slitt at troubleshooters.com Tue Jul 22 23:32:28 2014 From: slitt at troubleshooters.com (Steve Litt) Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2014 23:32:28 -0400 Subject: [TriLUG] troubleshooting spotty internet connectivity with TWCBC In-Reply-To: <123534544.17347.1406081912814.JavaMail.root@mail> References: <1128464859.17307.1406081320787.JavaMail.root@mail> <123534544.17347.1406081912814.JavaMail.root@mail> Message-ID: <20140722233228.123bac77@mydesq2.domain.cxm> On Tue, 22 Jul 2014 22:18:32 -0400 (EDT) Dewey Hylton wrote: > hi all, just wanting a sanity check here. > > i have a customer paying for TWC Business Class service. they run a > small shop (~20 computers) behind a *nix firewall, and have been > running this basic configuration for over a decade. no interesting > changes in the last couple of months. > > friday, they called and said they had issues getting to several > external websites that they use daily. i remoted a desktop, looked up > the dns record, captured packets on the external interface of the > firewall relating to that address, and tried hitting the site with a > browser. i saw outbound syn packets, but nothing in return. i > duplicated the test for another of their problematic sites and had > the same result. plenty of other sites worked fine. they had issues > with several sites, but the only two i tested were www.ups.com and > mail.yahoo.com. > > we've flushed internal dns cache, double-checked dns records against > google's cache (8.8.8.8), but stands out to me. > > i called TWCBC support. the first tech tried "accessing those 2 sites > via the cable modem" and failed. so, believing the problem was on > their end, he escalated the ticket. but the second level tech refuses > to work with me until i've connected a computer directly to the cable > modem. > > does this make sense to anyone? the firewall _is_ a computer, and is > much more capable of network testing and such than any of their > windows desktops or servers. and it is directly connected to the > cable modem already. > > am i missing some bit of logic somewhere? Yes. First, tech support people aren't half as smart as you, so they don't understand that if you connect a computer straight to the Internet, you need to reformat it immediately after, and never have that computer touch your lan until totally reformatted (and how do you detect a boot sector or bios virus?. Secondly, strange things happen. I had an intermittent dropout on Brighthouse. It went on for a couple months. On and on and on. Even though we managed (via my alerting them with my home-grown log file) to see their cable modem drop the signal when I lost connectivity, they still wanted me to take my Linux firewall off and put on a different computer, which I refused quite mockingly. About a month later the problem got solved. At once, 1) Their tech removed a stray cable, and 2) I replaced the firewall. Unfortunately, I wasn't in a position to back out my replacement to see if the intermittent came back, but heaven help me, I suspect that my firewall was sending some junk to the cable modem, causing problems. I felt sorry for the way I'd laughingly refused to plug in another computer, and mocked the guy, because I think he might have been right. I made myself a policy decision that next time, I'll format up a little Ubuntu machine to test the Internet directly, and then obviously reformat it immediately after. Of course, I personally think if they want me to have unsafe sex with the Internet, THEY should provide the known good replacement computer. Anyway, if you have a box you can format to plug directly in, and format again afterward, it *is* a valid diagnostic test, because strange things happen. SteveT Steve Litt * http://www.troubleshooters.com/ Troubleshooting Training * Human Performance From scott at hallcomm-inc.com Wed Jul 23 01:29:49 2014 From: scott at hallcomm-inc.com (Scott G. Hall) Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2014 01:29:49 -0400 Subject: [TriLUG] troubleshooting spotty internet connectivity with TWCBC In-Reply-To: <123534544.17347.1406081912814.JavaMail.root@mail> References: <123534544.17347.1406081912814.JavaMail.root@mail> Message-ID: <53CF484D.3060508@hallcomm-inc.com> On 07/22/2014 10:18 PM, Dewey Hylton wrote: > i have a customer paying for TWC Business Class service. they run a small shop (~20 computers) behind a *nix firewall,[...] > > friday, they called and said they had issues getting to several external websites that they use daily. [...] > > i called TWCBC support. the first tech tried "accessing those 2 sites via the cable modem" and failed. so, believing the problem was on their end, he escalated the ticket. but the second level tech refuses to work with me until i've connected a computer directly to the cable modem. > > does this make sense to anyone? the firewall _is_ a computer, and is much more capable of network testing and such than any of their windows desktops or servers. and it is directly connected to the cable modem already. I've had the same issues with both TWC customer support, and at another location Comcast's Xfinity customer support. What you are running into is "customer no-support" help-desk types that are only trained to use a troubleshooting script. They have no knowledge or expertise on network configuration, network troubleshooting tools, or even concepts of how the network works in the first place. To even get somebody remotely knowledgeable who can even listen and understand the basics, you'll have to force the issue and escalate to at least Tier-3. If they won't escalate that high, make noise with one of the consumer advocates (5-on-your-side, etc) and get a message to a VP or high-level manager. Otherwise you are just wasting your time. -- Scott G. Hall Owner & Chief Engineer Hall Communications Raleigh, NC, USA Scott at HallComm-Inc.Com From dboth at millennium-technology.com Wed Jul 23 07:29:28 2014 From: dboth at millennium-technology.com (David Both) Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2014 07:29:28 -0400 Subject: [TriLUG] troubleshooting spotty internet connectivity with TWCBC In-Reply-To: <53CF484D.3060508@hallcomm-inc.com> References: <123534544.17347.1406081912814.JavaMail.root@mail> <53CF484D.3060508@hallcomm-inc.com> Message-ID: <53CF9C98.8060107@millennium-technology.com> I have an account manager for my TWBC. I also have a TWBC hotline number I call which can be faster than the residential number. If the support folks are not doing the job I need them to, I contact the account manager. I usually get a competent person to talk to quite soon and they call me so I do not have to go through the VRU BS. I never ever bother with 1st level support. I always ask for 3rd level to start. If they refuse I ask for a manager. I always ALWAYS refuse to reboot or connect my computer directly. I sometimes have to get nasty or trot out my arrogant attitude - oh, wait I really am arrogant ;-) - and eventually they break down and give me what we need to resolve the problem. If you or they do not know who their account manager is, call TWBC marketing and find out. There seems to be a turnover every couple years for mine, but I probably would not want to be my account manager longer than that either. One example: I run my business out of my home. I had just terminated my TWC residential phone, TV and Internet service. The residential guy came out to the pedestal in front of my house and put a filter on the cable that blocked everything including my Business Class Internet. I did not bother contacting anyone else, I went straight to my account manager and a Business Class guy was out within 15 minutes. He removed the 1st filter and installed a different one. He also installed a large plastic flag on the filter that says something to the effect of "TWBC service. Call xxx-xxx-xxxx before making any changes." I am not a fan of TWBC or any other Internet provider. They are all monopolies and they have little regulation any more. I have found it sometimes necessary to threaten to contact my U.S. representative and the State of NC AG and Utilities Commission. However with the advent of satellite they are desperate to keep customers. Working the system can help a lot. On 07/23/2014 01:29 AM, Scott G. Hall wrote: > On 07/22/2014 10:18 PM, Dewey Hylton wrote: >> i have a customer paying for TWC Business Class service. they run a small shop (~20 computers) behind a *nix firewall,[...] >> >> friday, they called and said they had issues getting to several external websites that they use daily. [...] >> >> i called TWCBC support. the first tech tried "accessing those 2 sites via the cable modem" and failed. so, believing the problem was on their end, he escalated the ticket. but the second level tech refuses to work with me until i've connected a computer directly to the cable modem. >> >> does this make sense to anyone? the firewall _is_ a computer, and is much more capable of network testing and such than any of their windows desktops or servers. and it is directly connected to the cable modem already. > I've had the same issues with both TWC customer support, and at another location > Comcast's Xfinity customer support. > > What you are running into is "customer no-support" help-desk types that are only > trained to use a troubleshooting script. They have no knowledge or expertise on > network configuration, network troubleshooting tools, or even concepts of how > the network works in the first place. > > To even get somebody remotely knowledgeable who can even listen and understand > the basics, you'll have to force the issue and escalate to at least Tier-3. If > they won't escalate that high, make noise with one of the consumer advocates > (5-on-your-side, etc) and get a message to a VP or high-level manager. Otherwise > you are just wasting your time. > > > -- > > > ********************************************************* > David P. Both, RHCE > Millennium Technology Consulting LLC > 919-389-8678 > > dboth at millennium-technology.com > > www.millennium-technology.com > www.databook.bz - Home of the DataBook for Linux > DataBook is a Registered Trademark of David Both > ********************************************************* > This communication may be unlawfully collected and stored by the National Security Agency (NSA) in secret. The parties to this email do not consent to the retrieving or storing of this communication and any related metadata, as well as printing, copying, re-transmitting, disseminating, or otherwise using it. If you believe you have received this communication in error, please delete it immediately. > From jbroome at gmail.com Wed Jul 23 07:29:51 2014 From: jbroome at gmail.com (John Broome) Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2014 07:29:51 -0400 Subject: [TriLUG] troubleshooting spotty internet connectivity with TWCBC In-Reply-To: <53CF484D.3060508@hallcomm-inc.com> References: <123534544.17347.1406081912814.JavaMail.root@mail> <53CF484D.3060508@hallcomm-inc.com> Message-ID: I'll all for a circle-jerk about how much TWC sucks, but when I was having problems and they wanted me to hook directly into the cable modem, I did. I cranked up the firewall on my MBP, disabled all open ports and ran my ping / mtr tests and gave them the data. This is a linux list, you *do* have a linux machine to use for this test, right? Or a computer and a linux live CD? I also have/had smokeping running against the work VPN endpoint, the first TWC hop outside my router, the router and the cable modem so I can show them the graphs of everything fine on my side of the connection and how crap it is to their gateway. On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 1:29 AM, Scott G. Hall wrote: > On 07/22/2014 10:18 PM, Dewey Hylton wrote: > > i have a customer paying for TWC Business Class service. they run a > small shop (~20 computers) behind a *nix firewall,[...] > > > > friday, they called and said they had issues getting to several external > websites that they use daily. [...] > > > > i called TWCBC support. the first tech tried "accessing those 2 sites > via the cable modem" and failed. so, believing the problem was on their > end, he escalated the ticket. but the second level tech refuses to work > with me until i've connected a computer directly to the cable modem. > > > > does this make sense to anyone? the firewall _is_ a computer, and is > much more capable of network testing and such than any of their windows > desktops or servers. and it is directly connected to the cable modem > already. > > I've had the same issues with both TWC customer support, and at another > location > Comcast's Xfinity customer support. > > What you are running into is "customer no-support" help-desk types that > are only > trained to use a troubleshooting script. They have no knowledge or > expertise on > network configuration, network troubleshooting tools, or even concepts of > how > the network works in the first place. > > To even get somebody remotely knowledgeable who can even listen and > understand > the basics, you'll have to force the issue and escalate to at least > Tier-3. If > they won't escalate that high, make noise with one of the consumer > advocates > (5-on-your-side, etc) and get a message to a VP or high-level manager. > Otherwise > you are just wasting your time. > > -- > Scott G. Hall > Owner & Chief Engineer > Hall Communications > Raleigh, NC, USA > Scott at HallComm-Inc.Com > > -- > This message was sent to: jbroome at gmail.com > To unsubscribe, send a blank message to trilug-leave at trilug.org from that > address. > TriLUG mailing list : http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug > Unsubscribe or edit options on the web : > http://www.trilug.org/mailman/options/trilug/jbroome%40gmail.com > Welcome to TriLUG: http://trilug.org/welcome > From bill at arrowsreach.com Wed Jul 23 08:46:09 2014 From: bill at arrowsreach.com (Bill Farrow) Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2014 08:46:09 -0400 Subject: [TriLUG] troubleshooting spotty internet connectivity with TWCBC In-Reply-To: References: <123534544.17347.1406081912814.JavaMail.root@mail> <53CF484D.3060508@hallcomm-inc.com> Message-ID: On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 7:29 AM, John Broome wrote: > I also have/had smokeping running against the work VPN endpoint, the first > TWC hop outside my router, the router and the cable modem so I can show > them the graphs of everything fine on my side of the connection and how > crap it is to their gateway. Hard evidence like log data works every time. I have a cron job that pings the router, modem, and an external site and logs failures with a time stamp. I run this in two places, inside my work network and on an external machine. Here is a good example: http://www.cyberciti.biz/tips/simple-linux-and-unix-system-monitoring-with-ping-command-and-scripts.html My problem was resolved once I showed TWBC support that their modem was disappearing while all other hosts stayed up. TWBC replaced the Ubee modem with a Motorola which fixed it. In Dewey's case, it sounds like a TWBC internal routing problem. Bill From plug at hyltown.com Wed Jul 23 08:41:04 2014 From: plug at hyltown.com (Dewey Hylton) Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2014 08:41:04 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [TriLUG] troubleshooting spotty internet connectivity with TWCBC In-Reply-To: <123534544.17347.1406081912814.JavaMail.root@mail> Message-ID: <1963282771.17877.1406119264925.JavaMail.root@mail> > hi all, just wanting a sanity check here. > > am i missing some bit of logic somewhere? thanks for all the input. it sounds like i've passed the sanity check, and that i'm dealing with a script monkey. i'll spend the hour on the road for what i view as a waste of time, and i'll counter further obstinance with a request for next-level support. From plug at hyltown.com Wed Jul 23 08:41:52 2014 From: plug at hyltown.com (Dewey Hylton) Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2014 08:41:52 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [TriLUG] troubleshooting spotty internet connectivity with TWCBC In-Reply-To: <123534544.17347.1406081912814.JavaMail.root@mail> Message-ID: <104982266.17878.1406119312422.JavaMail.root@mail> > hi all, just wanting a sanity check here. > > am i missing some bit of logic somewhere? thanks for all the input. it sounds like i've passed the sanity check, and that i'm dealing with a script monkey. i'll spend the hour on the road for what i view as a waste of time, and i'll counter further obstinance with a request for next-level support. From jbroome at gmail.com Wed Jul 23 12:00:04 2014 From: jbroome at gmail.com (John Broome) Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2014 12:00:04 -0400 Subject: [TriLUG] troubleshooting spotty internet connectivity with TWCBC In-Reply-To: <1963282771.17877.1406119264925.JavaMail.root@mail> References: <1963282771.17877.1406119264925.JavaMail.root@mail> Message-ID: I thought the whole selling point of TWCBC was that you got a decent person when you had a problem, and it had an SLA. From:?Dewey Hylton Reply:?Triangle Linux Users Group General Discussion > Date:?July 23, 2014 at 8:50:12 AM To:?Triangle Linux Users Group General Discussion > Subject:? Re: [TriLUG] troubleshooting spotty internet connectivity with TWCBC > hi all, just wanting a sanity check here. > > am i missing some bit of logic somewhere? thanks for all the input. it sounds like i've passed the sanity check, and that i'm dealing with a script monkey. i'll spend the hour on the road for what i view as a waste of time, and i'll counter further obstinance with a request for next-level support. -- This message was sent to: jbroome at gmail.com To unsubscribe, send a blank message to trilug-leave at trilug.org from that address. TriLUG mailing list : http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug Unsubscribe or edit options on the web : http://www.trilug.org/mailman/options/trilug/jbroome%40gmail.com Welcome to TriLUG: http://trilug.org/welcome From plug at hyltown.com Wed Jul 23 12:22:10 2014 From: plug at hyltown.com (Dewey Hylton) Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2014 12:22:10 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [TriLUG] troubleshooting spotty internet connectivity with TWCBC In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <305027064.18372.1406132530376.JavaMail.root@mail> > From: "Bill Farrow" > To: "Triangle Linux Users Group General Discussion" > Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2014 8:46:09 AM > Subject: Re: [TriLUG] troubleshooting spotty internet connectivity with TWCBC > > On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 7:29 AM, John Broome > wrote: > > I also have/had smokeping running against the work VPN endpoint, > > the first > > TWC hop outside my router, the router and the cable modem so I can > > show > > them the graphs of everything fine on my side of the connection and > > how > > crap it is to their gateway. > > Hard evidence like log data works every time. I have a cron job that > pings the router, modem, and an external site and logs failures with > a > time stamp. I run this in two places, inside my work network and on > an > external machine. > > Here is a good example: > http://www.cyberciti.biz/tips/simple-linux-and-unix-system-monitoring-with-ping-command-and-scripts.html > > My problem was resolved once I showed TWBC support that their modem > was disappearing while all other hosts stayed up. TWBC replaced the > Ubee modem with a Motorola which fixed it. > > In Dewey's case, it sounds like a TWBC internal routing problem. > > Bill hard evidence only works where it works, and in my case TWCBC refused to look at the evidence. i already have the above type of script running continually. so ... i drove the hr to get onsite, got TWCBC on the phone, connected a bsd laptop directly to the modem, and saw the same exact results. no shock there. i then removed power from their modem, counted to 5, and reapplied power. once i was able to ping the gateway again the tests magically worked. so i cycled modem power once more and placed the firewall behind it. once the modem came back, everything magically worked. i suggested that the customer be added to the queue for receiving a new modem, and TWCBC support agreed. but until that happens, i have to assume the same will happen again at some random point in the future. at no point would TWCBC agree to seeing any of my logs, and that was the _first_ thing i offered on each of my 3 calls to them. From neilson at windstream.net Wed Jul 23 13:13:35 2014 From: neilson at windstream.net (Peter Neilson) Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2014 13:13:35 -0400 Subject: [TriLUG] troubleshooting spotty internet connectivity with TWCBC In-Reply-To: <305027064.18372.1406132530376.JavaMail.root@mail> References: <305027064.18372.1406132530376.JavaMail.root@mail> Message-ID: On Wed, 23 Jul 2014 12:22:10 -0400, Dewey Hylton wrote: > at no point would TWCBC agree to seeing any of my logs, and that was the > _first_ thing i offered on each of my 3 calls to them. Then the problem is at top-management level, and properly requires correction from above, not below. Sometimes the approach of, "Let's just get this thing solved, rather than following your approved procedure," works, but the problem's guaranteed to recur. Occasionally a service department is operated as a "profit center" and is expected to SELL EXTRA STUFF even if it's not needed. "While we are oiling and untangling the bits in your modem, we could install our Extra Special Super Deluxe Firewall Catastrophe Detector for only $399.95." Sort of like auto repair. There wasn't any hint of that, was there? From plug at hyltown.com Wed Jul 23 13:41:02 2014 From: plug at hyltown.com (Dewey Hylton) Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2014 13:41:02 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [TriLUG] troubleshooting spotty internet connectivity with TWCBC In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <1505980687.18423.1406137262263.JavaMail.root@mail> > From: "Peter Neilson" > To: "Triangle Linux Users Group General Discussion" > Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2014 1:13:35 PM > Subject: Re: [TriLUG] troubleshooting spotty internet connectivity with TWCBC > > On Wed, 23 Jul 2014 12:22:10 -0400, Dewey Hylton > wrote: > > > at no point would TWCBC agree to seeing any of my logs, and that > > was the > > _first_ thing i offered on each of my 3 calls to them. > > Then the problem is at top-management level, and properly requires > correction from above, not below. Sometimes the approach of, "Let's > just > get this thing solved, rather than following your approved > procedure," > works, but the problem's guaranteed to recur. > > Occasionally a service department is operated as a "profit center" > and is > expected to SELL EXTRA STUFF even if it's not needed. "While we are > oiling > and untangling the bits in your modem, we could install our Extra > Special > Super Deluxe Firewall Catastrophe Detector for only $399.95." Sort of > like > auto repair. There wasn't any hint of that, was there? no hint of that, thankfully. the customer was able to dig up their customer service rep's name, but when handing me the information she said "this person cannot be trusted" ... so i think there was a hint once upon a time. From slitt at troubleshooters.com Wed Jul 23 15:57:17 2014 From: slitt at troubleshooters.com (Steve Litt) Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2014 15:57:17 -0400 Subject: [TriLUG] troubleshooting spotty internet connectivity with TWCBC In-Reply-To: References: <305027064.18372.1406132530376.JavaMail.root@mail> Message-ID: <20140723155717.7a283cbc@mylap4> On Wed, 23 Jul 2014 13:13:35 -0400 "Peter Neilson" wrote: > On Wed, 23 Jul 2014 12:22:10 -0400, Dewey Hylton > wrote: > > > at no point would TWCBC agree to seeing any of my logs, and that > > was the _first_ thing i offered on each of my 3 calls to them. > > Then the problem is at top-management level, and properly requires > correction from above, not below. Sometimes the approach of, "Let's > just get this thing solved, rather than following your approved > procedure," works, but the problem's guaranteed to recur. I view the problem as a monopoly. Most businesses philosophy is "if I don't serve the customer, somebody else will." Because of how the data carriers have been able to carve up the country into area monopolies, their philosophy is "the hell with the customer, where else could he go?" SteveT From mhrivnak at hrivnak.org Wed Jul 23 17:45:47 2014 From: mhrivnak at hrivnak.org (Hrivnak, Michael) Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2014 17:45:47 -0400 Subject: [TriLUG] docker meetup next week Message-ID: I'm passing this along since there's been a lot of docker interest in the LUG. It looks like this was just scheduled yesterday: http://www.meetup.com/Docker-Raleigh/events/196434612/ It's in the same venue where we had our docker workshop. Michael From jtower at cerient.net Wed Jul 23 21:34:41 2014 From: jtower at cerient.net (jason tower) Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2014 21:34:41 -0400 Subject: [TriLUG] ip kvm switch Message-ID: <53D062B1.7070208@cerient.net> can anyone suggest a good quality datacenter kvm switch(es)? haven't bought any for quite a while so i'm a little behind on the current state of the art. we have nine racks, each with about six servers. really only need one physical console to handle all of them, so presumably something with cat5 extenders would be best. i also want remote IP capability that works well from linux workstations. beyond that i don't really need any other fancy features that the high end models tend to incorporate. From tube.radio at gmail.com Thu Jul 24 08:57:30 2014 From: tube.radio at gmail.com (Bill Weinel) Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2014 08:57:30 -0400 Subject: [TriLUG] ip kvm switch In-Reply-To: <53D062B1.7070208@cerient.net> References: <53D062B1.7070208@cerient.net> Message-ID: <46876040.GYJO3voGLR@speedy> On Wednesday, July 23, 2014 09:34:41 PM jason tower wrote: > can anyone suggest a good quality datacenter kvm switch(es)? haven't > bought any for quite a while so i'm a little behind on the current state > of the art. we have nine racks, each with about six servers. really > only need one physical console to handle all of them, so presumably > something with cat5 extenders would be best. i also want remote IP > capability that works well from linux workstations. beyond that i don't > really need any other fancy features that the high end models tend to > incorporate. I'd recommend Avocent AMX KVM switches (assuming your video output is not DVI.) We control about 40 systems through them. I don't think I've ever had a failure with one in the past 8 years. If you need DVI output then take a look at Avocent HMX or Matrix. Be aware, they are not cheap... But you get what you pay for. :) Cheers, Bill From htroberts at gmail.com Thu Jul 24 09:12:05 2014 From: htroberts at gmail.com (Heath Roberts) Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2014 09:12:05 -0400 Subject: [TriLUG] ip kvm switch In-Reply-To: <53D062B1.7070208@cerient.net> References: <53D062B1.7070208@cerient.net> Message-ID: I think the big players are still Raritan, Cyclades (bought by Avocent), and APC. They're all fine. We use HP, which I think is a rebadged Avocenet, at work, also fine, and I see a 16-port one of those on eBay for $50. If you buy a used one, make sure the seller either has or clears the passwords--IIRC they're not customer recoverable. One thing I like about the HP is that the server-side 'dongles' (that convert from RJ45 to video and either PS2 or USB) are pretty low-profile, and have short integral cables, unlike some of the others that want to plug directly into the server's video connector. I've not tried using one from a linux browser--we have linux servers but not desktops. On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 9:34 PM, jason tower wrote: > can anyone suggest a good quality datacenter kvm switch(es)? haven't > bought any for quite a while so i'm a little behind on the current state of > the art. we have nine racks, each with about six servers. really only > need one physical console to handle all of them, so presumably something > with cat5 extenders would be best. i also want remote IP capability that > works well from linux workstations. beyond that i don't really need any > other fancy features that the high end models tend to incorporate. > -- > This message was sent to: Heath Roberts > To unsubscribe, send a blank message to trilug-leave at trilug.org from that > address. > TriLUG mailing list : http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug > Unsubscribe or edit options on the web : http://www.trilug.org/mailman/ > options/trilug/htroberts%40gmail.com > Welcome to TriLUG: http://trilug.org/welcome > -- Heath Roberts htroberts at gmail.com From reginald.reed at gmail.com Thu Jul 24 10:51:05 2014 From: reginald.reed at gmail.com (Reginald Reed) Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2014 10:51:05 -0400 Subject: [TriLUG] ip kvm switch In-Reply-To: References: <53D062B1.7070208@cerient.net> Message-ID: What's the model number of the HP KVM Heath? From htroberts at gmail.com Thu Jul 24 15:19:40 2014 From: htroberts at gmail.com (Heath Roberts) Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2014 15:19:40 -0400 Subject: [TriLUG] ip kvm switch In-Reply-To: References: <53D062B1.7070208@cerient.net> Message-ID: The $50 one I was was an EO1010. Here's another: http://www.ebay.com/itm/290583636040. It looks like that may require a software client on the system where you want to view the remote console, and I'll bet that's windows-only. Looks like the seller of the one I posted also has some Avocent boxes, and at least one of those (DSR1031) says you can use it in a vanilla web browser. On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 10:51 AM, Reginald Reed wrote: > What's the model number of the HP KVM Heath? > -- > This message was sent to: Heath Roberts > To unsubscribe, send a blank message to trilug-leave at trilug.org from that > address. > TriLUG mailing list : http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug > Unsubscribe or edit options on the web : > http://www.trilug.org/mailman/options/trilug/htroberts%40gmail.com > Welcome to TriLUG: http://trilug.org/welcome > -- Heath Roberts htroberts at gmail.com From jmack at wm7d.net Sat Jul 26 17:39:53 2014 From: jmack at wm7d.net (Joseph Mack NA3T) Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2014 14:39:53 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [TriLUG] how big and where is the GPT Message-ID: I have a disk that had a GPT and now I want to return it to an MBR disk, by writing the image of an MBR disk onto it. When I do this fdisk still detects that the disk has a GPT. I've written 4G of zeroes with dd onto the start of the disk which I expected would overwrite the GPT. What do I have to zero out to remove the GPT? Thanks Jeo -- Joseph Mack NA3T EME(B,D), FM05lw North Carolina jmack (at) wm7d (dot) net - azimuthal equidistant map generator at http://www.wm7d.net/azproj.shtml Homepage http://www.austintek.com/ It's GNU/Linux! From brentrbrian at gmail.com Sat Jul 26 17:41:44 2014 From: brentrbrian at gmail.com (MrB) Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2014 17:41:44 -0400 Subject: [TriLUG] how big and where is the GPT In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Gparted? Brent R Brian on Samsung GS III Android Phone On Jul 26, 2014 5:40 PM, "Joseph Mack NA3T" wrote: > I have a disk that had a GPT and now I want to return it to an MBR disk, > by writing the image of an MBR disk onto it. When I do this fdisk still > detects that the disk has a GPT. I've written 4G of zeroes with dd onto the > start of the disk which I expected would overwrite the GPT. > > What do I have to zero out to remove the GPT? > > Thanks Jeo > > -- > Joseph Mack NA3T EME(B,D), FM05lw North Carolina > jmack (at) wm7d (dot) net - azimuthal equidistant map > generator at http://www.wm7d.net/azproj.shtml > Homepage http://www.austintek.com/ It's GNU/Linux! > -- > This message was sent to: Brent R Brian > To unsubscribe, send a blank message to trilug-leave at trilug.org from that > address. > TriLUG mailing list : http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug > Unsubscribe or edit options on the web : http://www.trilug.org/mailman/ > options/trilug/brentrbrian%40gmail.com > Welcome to TriLUG: http://trilug.org/welcome > From jmack at wm7d.net Sat Jul 26 17:52:33 2014 From: jmack at wm7d.net (Joseph Mack NA3T) Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2014 14:52:33 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [TriLUG] how big and where is the GPT In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sat, 26 Jul 2014, MrB wrote: > Gparted? well yes, but then I don't understand what's going on. What's Gparted doing? Here's my original request. >> What do I have to zero out to remove the GPT? I'm used to writing bits where I want them. I can't script gparted, but I can script writing bits. I have the image of the partitions. I just want to write the bootsector, then the partitions and go Joe -- Joseph Mack NA3T EME(B,D), FM05lw North Carolina jmack (at) wm7d (dot) net - azimuthal equidistant map generator at http://www.wm7d.net/azproj.shtml Homepage http://www.austintek.com/ It's GNU/Linux! From brentrbrian at gmail.com Sat Jul 26 17:54:49 2014 From: brentrbrian at gmail.com (MrB) Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2014 17:54:49 -0400 Subject: [TriLUG] how big and where is the GPT In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I believe gparted will allow you to set the partition table format you like Brent R Brian on Samsung GS III Android Phone On Jul 26, 2014 5:53 PM, "Joseph Mack NA3T" wrote: > On Sat, 26 Jul 2014, MrB wrote: > > Gparted? >> > > well yes, but then I don't understand what's going on. What's Gparted > doing? > > Here's my original request. > > What do I have to zero out to remove the GPT? >>> >> > I'm used to writing bits where I want them. I can't script gparted, but I > can script writing bits. I have the image of the partitions. I just want to > write the bootsector, then the partitions and go > > Joe > > -- > Joseph Mack NA3T EME(B,D), FM05lw North Carolina > jmack (at) wm7d (dot) net - azimuthal equidistant map > generator at http://www.wm7d.net/azproj.shtml > Homepage http://www.austintek.com/ It's GNU/Linux! > -- > This message was sent to: Brent R Brian > To unsubscribe, send a blank message to trilug-leave at trilug.org from that > address. > TriLUG mailing list : http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug > Unsubscribe or edit options on the web : http://www.trilug.org/mailman/ > options/trilug/brentrbrian%40gmail.com > Welcome to TriLUG: http://trilug.org/welcome > From lenboyle at msn.com Sat Jul 26 19:19:18 2014 From: lenboyle at msn.com (leonard boyle) Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2014 19:19:18 -0400 Subject: [TriLUG] how big and where is the GPT In-Reply-To: References: , , , Message-ID: This url says you can use GDISK. to How to Convert GPT to MBR on LinuxRead more : http://www.ehow.com/how_12119053_convert-gpt-mbr-linux.html http://www.ehow.com/how_12119053_convert-gpt-mbr-linux.htmlHow to Convert GPT to MBR on Linux There appear to several disk programs out in the wild. I am not sure if they have a common base or ... But I think this is the one that is wanted here. http://sourceforge.net/projects/gptfdisk/ This is the web site of the person that wrote the code. Interesting site. http://www.rodsbooks.com len From redwolfe at gmail.com Sat Jul 26 22:33:28 2014 From: redwolfe at gmail.com (Gregory Woodbury) Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2014 22:33:28 -0400 Subject: [TriLUG] how big and where is the GPT In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: To answer the original question: GPT keeps a backup of the tables at the end of the disk as well as at the front. When looking at a disk the (U)EFI code looks at the back of the disk first and presumes that something has corrupted the front copy if it finds a valid GPT table at the end. There is also a "protective" MBR entry on GPT disks with more GPT stuff along the way. Using gptfdisk on the device is the easiest way to wipe the GPT tables. Tell the gdisk program to install a new MBR style disklabel. Then write it. After that, the GPT tables are gone, and our old way of doing things works as expected. You can try writing 4Gb at the end of the disk as well, that might get all the cruft gone. -- G.Wolfe Woodbury On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 7:19 PM, leonard boyle wrote: > > This url says you can use GDISK. > to How to Convert GPT to MBR on LinuxRead more : > http://www.ehow.com/how_12119053_convert-gpt-mbr-linux.html > http://www.ehow.com/how_12119053_convert-gpt-mbr-linux.htmlHow to Convert > GPT to MBR on Linux > There appear to several disk programs out in the wild. I am not sure if > they have a common base or ... > But I think this is the one that is wanted here. > http://sourceforge.net/projects/gptfdisk/ > This is the web site of the person that wrote the code. Interesting site. > http://www.rodsbooks.com > > len > > > > > > > > > -- > This message was sent to: redwolfe at gmail.com > To unsubscribe, send a blank message to trilug-leave at trilug.org from that > address. > TriLUG mailing list : http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug > Unsubscribe or edit options on the web : > http://www.trilug.org/mailman/options/trilug/redwolfe%40gmail.com > Welcome to TriLUG: http://trilug.org/welcome > -- -- G.Wolfe Woodbury redwolfe at gmail.com From jmack at wm7d.net Sun Jul 27 21:46:52 2014 From: jmack at wm7d.net (Joseph Mack NA3T) Date: Sun, 27 Jul 2014 18:46:52 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [TriLUG] how big and where is the GPT In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sat, 26 Jul 2014, Gregory Woodbury wrote: > To answer the original question: GPT keeps a backup of the tables at the end > of the disk as well as at the front. it would appear so. It must be in the last 8G. I just dd'ed a bunch of zeroes onto the disk, every now and then checking if it still had a GPT. With 8G to go, it still had a GPT, but when I came back and the dd had finished, the GPT was gone. > When looking at a disk the (U)EFI code looks at the back of the disk first this is not obvious from the wikipedia page > and presumes that something has corrupted the front copy if it finds a valid > GPT table at the end. There is also a "protective" MBR entry on GPT disks with > more GPT stuff along the way. The GPT is spread throughout the disk, like superblocks? > Using gptfdisk on the device is the easiest way to wipe the GPT tables. I don't mind using a tool if I know what it's doing. I had assumed the GPT was just a longer version of the MBR and would be overwritten by dd'ing an (MBR style) image onto the disk. When it still had the GPT, I saw that my method of restoring an image didn't work anymore and that I didn't understand GPT. > Tell the gdisk program to install a new MBR style disklabel. Then write it. > After that, the GPT tables are gone, and our old way of doing things works as > expected. I was hoping just to do a scripted dd. I didn't want to have to go in there by hand. > You can try writing 4Gb at the end of the disk as well, that might get all the > cruft gone. I don't know why the image didn't write over the end of the disk. I will have to think about this. Thanks for the help. I have my immediate problem handled. I can remove the GPT by dd'ing zeroes onto the disk. Joe -- Joseph Mack NA3T EME(B,D), FM05lw North Carolina jmack (at) wm7d (dot) net - azimuthal equidistant map generator at http://www.wm7d.net/azproj.shtml Homepage http://www.austintek.com/ It's GNU/Linux!