From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DB97D158042 for ; Thu, 31 Oct 2024 15:09:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5EA99E0894; Thu, 31 Oct 2024 15:09:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smarthost01a.sbp.mail.zen.net.uk (smarthost01a.sbp.mail.zen.net.uk [212.23.1.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (prime256v1) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 21213E087F for ; Thu, 31 Oct 2024 15:09:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [82.69.80.10] (helo=cube.localnet) by smarthost01a.sbp.mail.zen.net.uk with esmtpsa (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.95) (envelope-from ) id 1t6Wnz-00EiNz-I9 for gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org; Thu, 31 Oct 2024 15:09:50 +0000 From: Peter Humphrey To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] nfs mounting Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2024 15:09:50 +0000 Message-ID: <3330731.44csPzL39Z@cube> In-Reply-To: <2020013.8hb0ThOEGa@rogueboard> References: <10555432.nUPlyArG6x@cube> <2202241.irdbgypaU6@cube> <2020013.8hb0ThOEGa@rogueboard> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org X-Auto-Response-Suppress: DR, RN, NRN, OOF, AutoReply MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" X-Originating-smarthost01a-IP: [82.69.80.10] Feedback-ID: 82.69.80.10 X-Archives-Salt: f949edfe-2a71-46e6-b3ec-51960b23e969 X-Archives-Hash: dd4ec0e038cac9137d164f0ab47e8cef On Thursday 31 October 2024 14:21:27 GMT Michael wrote: > On Thursday 31 October 2024 11:07:13 GMT Peter Humphrey wrote: > > I've always used static addresses. The exception is the wireless network, > > on which things come and go. I'm confident in dnsmasq on the wired LAN - > > it's been running for years. > > Is dnsmasq also used by the wireless network successfully, or is the router > running its own DHCP/DNS show? I meant to say: dnsmasq serves the wired network; the router serves DHCP to the wireless one, since it's directly upstream of them and dnsmasq isn't. --->8 > > The router is a Fritz!Box, and it's a bit of a beast to understand. (Is > > there a characteristic German approach to user interface design? I begin > > to wonder, what with this and my boiler...) > > Fritz!Box is one of the better provisioned domestic routers. That'll be why Zen Internet uses it then. That's my ISP, as you can tell from my address. > I've only used it once and mostly over wired Ethernet, but was impressed by > its functions and features compared to other rubbish on the market. I can't > recall its firewall options menu - I would think there would be no > restrictions across LAN devices, bar Wireless Client Isolation. Different > VLANs would either way isolate wireless devices to their own broadcast > domain. For a quick test you can disable wireless client isolation and see > if things start working as expected. I've just tried to find its firewall setup, and failed. Searching for 'firewall' in the manual finds nothing. I'll keep looking. -- Regards, Peter.