NFS does not require username/password. The checks and access control are performed by client itself (which is why nfs is considered insecure).
I've been looking everywhere, but I'm curious: Has anybody got a working NFS share working using the Windows services for Unix toolkit (SFU)?
I can see the shared directory's in 'My Network Places' -> 'Entire Network' -> 'Favourite LAN'. When I want to mount it (or just access it), it asks me for a username and password but every username/password I enter is wrong (and yes, I tried the admin user as well)...
NFS does not require username/password. The checks and access control are performed by client itself (which is why nfs is considered insecure).
Well that seems to be the problem. I did enter a 0, but for some reason it won't save it. This isn't a proflem for me, I enterd 65000 and it should be online all the time , but it is still interesting.Originally Posted by Oleg
Hmm, yes it seems to be: http://wl500g.info/attachment.php?at...ntid=398&stc=1Originally Posted by Oleg
But when I want to access it, Windows says: http://wl500g.info/attachment.php?at...ntid=399&stc=1
I've got not a clue why... (I am administrator on my computer).
EDIT: Forget this question please, I found out I need to setup some usermapping for SFU.... I'll report later
Last edited by Styno; 30-03-2005 at 22:07.
Summary of problem:
Asus is setup as WiFi client,attaches to ISP’s AP, but is not able to send or receive any IP packets on WiFi interface.
LAN ethernet ports are isolated from router inside Asus.
----------------------
Hi,
I tried to setup Asus 500g Deluxe as Wifi client to connect my home LAN to ISP using WiFi. It looks like there is either some bug in gx version or (more probably) there is problem in my setup (typical problem between keyboard and chair). I have some networking experience (Cisco CCIE,CCNP,CCDP) but Asus is new for me. I tested real life connection to ISP and later (after long hours of fight with ASUS) I built testing lab environment to limit ISP's complications (MAC filtering, security filters etc..). My ASUS worked in lab same way as in real life - WiFi connection has been built (my ASUS attached to AP) but there is no possibility to get DHCP reply, there is 0 packets received on WiFi interface from air. Another (very similar) behaviour is on LAN (eth 0.1) ports, it seems that they are only unidirectional ports.
I am sorry if I made some stupid error in setup but I spent long hours with Asus and I am desperate now. I tried almost everything (different setups, tried all HOWTOs I was able to find) and it does not work as expected.
I described my setup (pictures, screenshots, listings) and my tests as a Word file at http://www.tenzor.cz/surfer/asus/ASUSproblem.doc and I am attaching it to this post.
Could you give me some hint how to make this great router with Oleg's firmware (I like it, really) working in my setup?
Thanks
Ivan
i've not read your .doc file yetOriginally Posted by Aiwan
and I'm also not sure if WL500g.Deluxe as Wireless Client works
I will try this asap when I find some time..
(I have the same setup with WL-HDD/WL-500g and 1.9.2.7-3c firmware which works flawless only no encryption is used, so please try 1.9.2.7-3c too if you use no encryption)
My little Asus Collection: Too much to fit inhere, my 2 babies:WL500w 1.9.2.7-10(OLEG) VX2SE Yellow Lamborghini notebook
WL500g Forum Asus Files OpenDir
Asusforum.NL -- Asusforum.DE -- Asusforum.RU -- Asusforum.PL -- Asusforum.NET -- Asusforum.EU -- Asusforum.BE -- Asusforum.ES -- Asusforum.INFO
Where are you from? If you're from Russia, then PM me. To be honest, client mode was never tested with wl500gx, so LAN port problems could be there.Originally Posted by Aiwan
As for WLAN problem - do you use hex wep keys or passphrases? Passphrases are know to cause problems (as they're mostly vendor specific, unlike WPA-PSK keys), use hex keys only. Also, have you tried using it without WEP at all?
Also, dependening on the peer software it could require either "Shared Key" authentication (like you've specified) or "Open System / Shared Key" (this way key is used for data encryption only).
Ok, I will check on this. Thanks.Originally Posted by dejay
To get back on the Perl discussion: Why is it so difficult to get Perl compiled for a non x86 CPU? It's not that I want to equalize PHP with Perl, but PHP did compile quite easilly for WL-500g as well as NSLU2 AFAIK...
Perl on the WL-500g or any other non x86 would be great because of the enormous amount of scripts available for it (like Webmin ).
I have the same problem as AIWAN but then with a 500g. I have an 500gx that is set in AP mode and an 500g in client mode.
With a PC on a 500gx-LAN-port I can logon in the 500g but I cannot connect to a PC on a 500g-LAN-port. The other way around gives also a problem: an PC on a 500g-LAN-port can login in the 500g but cannot login in the 500gx nor connect to an PC on an 500gx-LAN-port.
So there is no connection between the wireless part of the 500g and the LAN-ports on that box. In ethernet-bridge-mode this problem doesnot exists. On both boxes I use fw 1.9.2.7-4.
We had to natively compile Perl - we couldn't easily cross-compile it. So a lot of the effort was getting a native compilation environment working.Originally Posted by Styno
I believe PHP was cross-compiled without many issues.
In fact microperl could be cross compiled, at least openwrt has it.
Just a small question in between. Is this 'range problem' solved in the latest CR4 release? I searched through the forum but couldn't find any info.
regards,
Theo.
wi-fi part is still the same, as this firmware is based on the 1.9.2.7.Originally Posted by Theo
Thanks for reply Oleg, I am from Czech Republic (I have studied russian language 11 years but my technichal russian is bad ). I am using passphrase, but I assume that if wl status shows that I am connected, it means that WEP encryption works well and data should go through. I'll test all possibilities recommended and let you know.Originally Posted by Oleg
LAN ports (eth0.1) is solvable by hack using crossover cable between WAN and LAN ethernet port (3 remaining ports are enough for now). This is low priority issue.
WiFi isssue is much more serious.
Thanks for hints Oleg. I appreciate it.