<html>
  <head>
    <meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
      http-equiv="Content-Type">
  </head>
  <body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">Mike, what I was trying to walk you
      through is outlined on several web pages if you do a search. I
      have included one of those links for your convenience. Your
      provided modem/router (router 1) uses either DSL or Cable for its
      WAN/Internet port. I would heavily suggest against you making any
      changes to router 1. SOHO routers typically have a cluster of
      ports which can be lumped together under the title LAN. Most SOHO
      routers will have a port off the side from that grouping to help
      you distinguish the fact that it is the WAN/Internet port.<br>
      <br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://library.techguy.org/wiki/Connecting_two_SOHO_broadband_routers_together">http://library.techguy.org/wiki/Connecting_two_SOHO_broadband_routers_together</a><br>
      <br>
      Gilbert<br>
      <br>
      <br>
      On 7/20/2014 8:19 PM, Michael Havens wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote
cite="mid:CAFRvun+4fNTtk-+3usySHaHFz14D6nmga0z79XVC-ivotwtMVw@mail.gmail.com"
      type="cite">
      <div dir="ltr">
        <div>there is my problem..... I can't get into the settings page
          of the extra router. hmmmm. I tried lynx from the computer w/o
          (one of the computers connected to it) the gui and now it is
          asking for login credentials.... I wonder what they are? found
          it! Okay... well lynx is useless with this!<br>
          <br>
        </div>
        <div>Goofy me..... I can use my brother's computer (which is
          connected to the router in question). There is a setting for
          DHCP Server.... I'll disable that! <br>
        </div>
        <div>As for setting it to bridge mode...<br>
        </div>
        <div>I think there is one setting it might be: a choice in the
          operating mode between "Gateway" and "Router"<br>
          <br>
        </div>
        Thanks for letting me know about the LAN ports.<br>
      </div>
      <div class="gmail_extra">
        <br clear="all">
        <div>:-)~MIKE~(-:</div>
        <br>
        <br>
        <div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, Jul 20, 2014 at 6:47 PM, sean <span
            dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
              href="mailto:sean.a.ritzler@gmail.com" target="_blank">sean.a.ritzler@gmail.com</a>></span>
          wrote:<br>
          <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
            .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
            You don't have to change the firmware. Just make your extra
            wireless<br>
            device a wireless bridge + ethernet switch without DHCP.
            Problem<br>
            solved. By the way, those 4 ports ARE the LAN ports.<br>
            <div class="HOEnZb">
              <div class="h5"><br>
                On Sun, Jul 20, 2014 at 6:44 PM, Michael Havens <<a
                  moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:bmike1@gmail.com">bmike1@gmail.com</a>>
                wrote:<br>
                > cool.... apparently if I do the firmware upgrade
                I'll be able to receive as<br>
                > well as send.<br>
                ><br>
                > :-)~MIKE~(-:<br>
                ><br>
                ><br>
                > On Sun, Jul 20, 2014 at 6:17 PM, Michael Havens
                <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
                  href="mailto:bmike1@gmail.com">bmike1@gmail.com</a>>
                wrote:<br>
                >><br>
                >> I think I should give you the models of my
                devices:<br>
                >> the router is a wrt54g and the modem is a
                pk5000. I did a little more<br>
                >> searching and read that I can change the
                firmware on the router but if<br>
                >> memory is correct if I screw up it becomes a
                brick so I need to ask what the<br>
                >> benefits are and if there is another way to do
                it. I just looked closely at<br>
                >> the router and it is labled as a wireless
                router and a 4 port switch.<br>
                >><br>
                >> :-)~MIKE~(-:<br>
                >><br>
                >><br>
                >> On Sat, Jul 19, 2014 at 11:39 AM, Michael
                Havens <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
                  href="mailto:bmike1@gmail.com">bmike1@gmail.com</a>>
                wrote:<br>
                >>><br>
                >>> >Why were rules written for the second
                router but not the first?<br>
                >>> >Is it because it was connected first?
                Could we write the rules we need?<br>
                >>><br>
                >>> What I meant was the second was connected
                to the first.<br>
                >>><br>
                >>><br>
                >>> :-)~MIKE~(-:<br>
                >>><br>
                >>><br>
                >>> On Sat, Jul 19, 2014 at 11:31 AM, Michael
                Havens <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
                  href="mailto:bmike1@gmail.com">bmike1@gmail.com</a>><br>
                >>> wrote:<br>
                >>>><br>
                >>>> > Going the other way, you have no
                rules to pass<br>
                >>>> > the communication through.<br>
                >>>><br>
                >>>> Why were rules written for the second
                router but not the first? Is it<br>
                >>>> because it was connected first? Could
                we write the rules we need?<br>
                >>>><br>
                >>>><br>
                >>>> :-)~MIKE~(-:<br>
                >>>><br>
                >>>><br>
                >>>> On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 3:34 PM,
                Gilbert T. Gutierrez, Jr.<br>
                >>>> <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
                  href="mailto:mailing-lists@phoenixinternet.net">mailing-lists@phoenixinternet.net</a>>
                wrote:<br>
                >>>>><br>
                >>>>> NAT is the reason. The ping is
                being translated from one network to<br>
                >>>>> another as well as telnet. Going
                the other way, you have no rules to pass<br>
                >>>>> the communication through.<br>
                >>>>><br>
                >>>>> Gilbert<br>
                >>>>><br>
                >>>>><br>
                >>>>> On 7/18/2014 2:44 PM, Michael
                Havens wrote:<br>
                >>>>><br>
                >>>>> so according to your tutorial
                192.168.0.x is not on the same subnet as<br>
                >>>>> 192.168.1.x. If that is correct why
                can I ssh (and ping and telnet....) from<br>
                >>>>> client to host but not host to
                client?<br>
                >>>>><br>
                >>>>> :-)~MIKE~(-:<br>
                >>>>><br>
                >>>>><br>
                >>>>> On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 12:30 PM,
                Michael Havens <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
                  href="mailto:bmike1@gmail.com">bmike1@gmail.com</a>><br>
                >>>>> wrote:<br>
                >>>>>><br>
                >>>>>> telnet localhost 22 from the
                server received no answer from the client<br>
                >>>>>> telnet 192.168.1.101 22 from
                the client received no answer from the<br>
                >>>>>> server<br>
                >>>>>><br>
                >>>>>> I'll get back to you about the
                research project<br>
                >>>>>>  (and as a private message)<br>
                >>>>>><br>
                >>>>>> :-)~MIKE~(-:<br>
                >>>>>><br>
                >>>>>><br>
                >>>>>> On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 6:41
                AM, <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
                  href="mailto:kitepilot@kitepilot.com">kitepilot@kitepilot.com</a>>
                wrote:<br>
                >>>>>>><br>
                >>>>>>> Hello Michael:<br>
                >>>>>>> the 'Net' is a hodgepodge
                of protocols, all abiding to the 'OSI Layer<br>
                >>>>>>> Model' to work properly (<a
                  moz-do-not-send="true"
                  href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OSI_model"
                  target="_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OSI_model</a>).<br>
                >>>>>>> Troubleshooting your SSH
                connection should be a fairly simple<br>
                >>>>>>> proposition, because there
                are only so many moving parts (Three!).<br>
                >>>>>>> As anything under the OSI
                model, nothing on an upper layer will work<br>
                >>>>>>> unless the necessary
                components of the lower layer are working.<br>
                >>>>>>> AND you *HAVE* to
                troubleshoot each layer separately.<br>
                >>>>>>> So how does this go?<br>
                >>>>>>> Well, lets take a look at
                your SSH problem...<br>
                >>>>>>> 1.- In order for the SSH
                connection to work you need 3 things:<br>
                >>>>>>> 1.1.- a SSH server,<br>
                >>>>>>> 1.2.- a SSH client and,<br>
                >>>>>>> 1.3.- a TCP/IP connection.<br>
                >>>>>>> *EACH* one of the lines
                above is a separate project and *HAS* to be<br>
                >>>>>>> addressed as such.<br>
                >>>>>>> Lets cover the basics
                first, the TCP/IP connection:<br>
                >>>>>>> You *HAVE* to *KNOW* The
                Mantra:<br>
                >>>>>>> "In order for any 2 devices
                to establish a TCP connection they have<br>
                >>>>>>> to share a physical link
                and they need addresses in the same subnet".<br>
                >>>>>>> The statement above is a
                pretty dense one, and has several<br>
                >>>>>>> implications, number one
                being: What does "subnet" mean?<br>
                >>>>>>> Another is: what about IPs
                in different subnets?<br>
                >>>>>>> We'll get there...<br>
                >>>>>>> As there are already
                several books written (and to be written) about<br>
                >>>>>>> the few lines above, I'll
                water it down to the bare minimum:<br>
                >>>>>>> The subnet is defined via
                the netmask, and implies that "ON" parts of<br>
                >>>>>>> the netmask are always
                equal in all the addresses on a network segment, so:<br>
                >>>>>>> Network:<br>
                >>>>>>> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
                  href="http://192.168.0.0/24" target="_blank">192.168.0.0/24</a>
                or<br>
                >>>>>>> 192.168.0.0 with netmask
                255.255.255.0 means that<br>
                >>>>>>> *ALL* the addresses in
                *THIS* network are going to look like<br>
                >>>>>>> 192.168.0.${SOMETHING_ELSE}<br>
                >>>>>>> '192.168.0' is the
                "Network", and "${SOMETHING_ELSE}" is the "Host".<br>
                >>>>>>> You can not use "Host 0"
                (because that defines the network) and you<br>
                >>>>>>> can not use the highest
                number (255) because that's the 'broadcast address'.<br>
                >>>>>>> Which means that any '/24"
                (slash 24) network can address 254<br>
                >>>>>>> 'hosts'.<br>
                >>>>>>> Network:<br>
                >>>>>>> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
                  href="http://192.168.0.0/16" target="_blank">192.168.0.0/16</a>
                or<br>
                >>>>>>> 192.168.0.0 with netmask
                255.255.0.0 means that<br>
                >>>>>>> *ALL* the addresses in
                *THIS* network are going to look like<br>
                >>>>>>>
                192.168.${SOMETHING_ELSE}.${SOMETHING_ELSE}<br>
                >>>>>>> '192.168' is the "Network",
                and "${SOMETHING_ELSE}.${SOMETHING_ELSE}"<br>
                >>>>>>> is the "Host".<br>
                >>>>>>> You can not use "Host 0.0"
                (because that defines the network) and you<br>
                >>>>>>> can not use the highest
                number (255.255) because that's the 'broadcast<br>
                >>>>>>> address'.<br>
                >>>>>>> Which means that any '/16"
                (slash 16) network can address 65534<br>
                >>>>>>> 'hosts'.<br>
                >>>>>>> The reason why '255' is the
                highest number is because IPv4 addresses<br>
                >>>>>>> (and netmasks) are
                represented in memory in 4 bytes, each number one byte.<br>
                >>>>>>> Bytes are 8 bits, but
                that's a different book that you need to read<br>
                >>>>>>> too, lets move on with the
                network.<br>
                >>>>>>> Things get pretty
                interesting (and math pretty convoluted) when you<br>
                >>>>>>> define networks like <a
                  moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://192.168.127.0/25"
                  target="_blank">192.168.127.0/25</a><br>
                >>>>>>> If yo want to see all
                variations, you can be lazy (like me) and run:<br>
                >>>>>>> ipcalc <a
                  moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://192.168.0.127/25"
                  target="_blank">192.168.0.127/25</a><br>
                >>>>>>> Finally, "Netmasks" are a
                patch to the first defined (and<br>
                >>>>>>> shortsighted) 'Address
                Type' as class A,B,C or D, but I'll let you research<br>
                >>>>>>> that yourself.<br>
                >>>>>>><br>
                >>>>>>> Well, that's all good, but
                how do you talk to other addresses?, I<br>
                >>>>>>> talk to google.com...<br>
                >>>>>>> That's a valid question,
                but<br>
                >>>>>>> 1.- it is not part of
                *THIS* SSH problem and<br>
                >>>>>>> 2.- you don't 'talk to
                google'.<br>
                >>>>>>> We'll talk more about how
                devices find each other in a network down<br>
                >>>>>>> below, but in order to talk
                to devices outside your network you need the<br>
                >>>>>>> 'Routing Protocol'
                (implemented at [SURPRISE!] 'the router') which is<br>
                >>>>>>> nothing else than a table
                of rules stating 'this IP goes that way'.  In your<br>
                >>>>>>> case, all addresses go the
                same place (the router) so the router becomes the<br>
                >>>>>>> 'Default Gateway'.  As to
                resolve google, you need the DNS, but you knew<br>
                >>>>>>> that...   :)<br>
                >>>>>>><br>
                >>>>>>> Now that we know what an IP
                address is, lets move on to the "Physical<br>
                >>>>>>> Link".<br>
                >>>>>>> Well, a cable will do...<br>
                >>>>>>> In the wireless world, the
                "Association" is the link.<br>
                >>>>>>> And how do you validate
                that?<br>
                >>>>>>> iwconfig will tell you what
                (if anything) you are associated to.  No<br>
                >>>>>>> association, no link, no
                connection, no SSH.<br>
                >>>>>>> ifconfig will tell you what
                (if anything) you are wired to.  No wire,<br>
                >>>>>>> no link, no connection, no
                SSH.<br>
                >>>>>>> Ain't that simple?   ;-)<br>
                >>>>>>> So we have a link...<br>
                >>>>>>> And we have IP addresses in
                the same subnet.<br>
                >>>>>>> So we are connected!!!  
                8-)<br>
                >>>>>>> Not so fast Armando!!!<br>
                >>>>>>> The fact that your
                addresses match is not necessarily a validation,<br>
                >>>>>>> because each computer may
                be connected to a different router providing the<br>
                >>>>>>> same NAT(ed) address!<br>
                >>>>>>> NAT?<br>
                >>>>>>> Yes NAT (Network Address
                Translation protocol), but that's yet<br>
                >>>>>>> another book, so lets water
                it down:<br>
                >>>>>>> NAT is the protocol that
                allows you to have an 'outside visible<br>
                >>>>>>> address' and an 'inside
                invisible network' in a router.<br>
                >>>>>>> NAT (as Netmask) was
                implemented mainly to alleviate the IPv4<br>
                >>>>>>> shortage address because of
                the 'class A,B,C or D' mistake, but as a<br>
                >>>>>>> byproduct, you can 'hide'
                behind it, which provides some level of security.<br>
                >>>>>>> How you hide is yet another
                bookshelf and essentially means that you cannot<br>
                >>>>>>> access devices 'behind the
                router' unless the device initiates the<br>
                >>>>>>> connection first, and
                that's how you raise a WEB site from 'behind the<br>
                >>>>>>> router' and why you can SSH
                from 'inside to outside the router' but not the<br>
                >>>>>>> other way around, so lets
                move on...<br>
                >>>>>>> So, how do we know that we
                are connected to the same router?<br>
                >>>>>>> Ah, glad you asked:<br>
                >>>>>>> ARP!<br>
                >>>>>>> Or Address Resolution
                Protocol.<br>
                >>>>>>> *ALL* data transmission is
                done at OSI layer 2.<br>
                >>>>>>> Quick implementation
                manual:<br>
                >>>>>>> OSI layer 1: Cable or
                association.<br>
                >>>>>>> OSI layer 2: MAC address.<br>
                >>>>>>> OSI layer 3: IP address.<br>
                >>>>>>> Your network doesn't know
                (and doesn't care) about IP addresses.  The<br>
                >>>>>>> IP address is there to
                resolve the MAC address.<br>
                >>>>>>> When you say:<br>
                >>>>>>> ping 192.168.0.1<br>
                >>>>>>> that generates a 'who has'
                request from the ARP protocol.<br>
                >>>>>>> That request is broadcasted
                to anyone on the physical link (OSI layer<br>
                >>>>>>> 1)<br>
                >>>>>>> The device with the IP
                address interrogated by 'who has' answers with<br>
                >>>>>>> its MAC address.<br>
                >>>>>>> This IP/MAC address pair is
                then saved to the ARP table.<br>
                >>>>>>> >From there on (and even
                though the IP address goes along in the<br>
                >>>>>>> TCP/IP header) all
                transmissions are sent to the MAC address.<br>
                >>>>>>> But then again, how do you
                know that your 2 boxes are talking to the<br>
                >>>>>>> same router?<br>
                >>>>>>> arp -n|grep 192.168.1.1<br>
                >>>>>>> Same MAC?<br>
                >>>>>>> Same box.<br>
                >>>>>>> Different MAC?<br>
                >>>>>>> Same Michael...   ;-)<br>
                >>>>>>> What do we know so far?<br>
                >>>>>>> Well, we know something
                about line 3 of the very first paragraph.<br>
                >>>>>>> What about line 2?<br>
                >>>>>>> Type<br>
                >>>>>>> which ssh<br>
                >>>>>>> You have it or not, and you
                know what to do, so lets move to line 1.<br>
                >>>>>>> We now need to troubleshoot
                the SSH server.<br>
                >>>>>>> Well, that boils down to 2
                things, it is working or not...<br>
                >>>>>>> You *KNOW* that the SSH
                server is 'listening' (although not<br>
                >>>>>>> necessarily working) when
                you can connect to the 'port'<br>
                >>>>>>> Port?<br>
                >>>>>>> Yeah, port...<br>
                >>>>>>> Lets move on up in the OSI
                model to the application layer.<br>
                >>>>>>> In order to establish a TCP
                connection you need an IP connection and<br>
                >>>>>>> a port (or a socket and a
                port)<br>
                >>>>>>> The port is to the
                application what the IP address is to the MAC.<br>
                >>>>>>> So if the port is
                listening, the application is awake.<br>
                >>>>>>> And how do we know?<br>
                >>>>>>> There are only 975143684
                possible ways to validate a 'port is open'<br>
                >>>>>>> (or listening) but I am a
                simple boring guy, so I do:<br>
                >>>>>>> telnet localhost 22<br>
                >>>>>>> I either get an answer or
                not.<br>
                >>>>>>> If I get an answer, then we
                are most likely all good, but if I don't<br>
                >>>>>>> get an answer then the
                ramifications are staggering and I'm not even going<br>
                >>>>>>> to think about it.<br>
                >>>>>>> In order to check that the
                other port listens then you:<br>
                >>>>>>> telnet ${REMOTE} 22<br>
                >>>>>>> Again, we either get an
                answer or not.  And the 'not' means another<br>
                >>>>>>> Sunday drive to the
                library...<br>
                >>>>>>> Finally, why 22?<br>
                >>>>>>> Because that's the SSH port
                and it is defined in the configuration<br>
                >>>>>>> file, which you can change
                to further complicate your (or someone else's)<br>
                >>>>>>> life.<br>
                >>>>>>> But who and where defined
                22 as the SSH port?<br>
                >>>>>>> grep -i ssh /etc/services<br>
                >>>>>>> And who wrote
                /etc/services?<br>
                >>>>>>> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
                  href="http://www.iana.org/" target="_blank">http://www.iana.org/</a><br>
                >>>>>>> And how do I know all this
                crap?<br>
                >>>>>>> Because I finished LFS!!!!
                   ;-)<br>
                >>>>>>> I hope you see everything
                now as clear as mud.<br>
                >>>>>>> Keep this message handy,
                you'll need to read it several times...<br>
                >>>>>>> Keep in mind that what I
                have written here is a GROSS<br>
                >>>>>>> oversimplification of
                several bookshelves contained in several buildings and<br>
                >>>>>>> written along several
                decades all over the World, it's free advice, you<br>
                >>>>>>> can't sue me...   :)<br>
                >>>>>>> And always remember:<br>
                >>>>>>> For every question there
                exists a simple, direct and wrong answer.<br>
                >>>>>>> if you have any question,<br>
                >>>>>>> you will get any answer...<br>
                >>>>>>> ET<br>
                >>>>>>> PS: Research project:<br>
                >>>>>>> Why doesn't 'ping' use a
                port?<br>
                >>>>>>> Why is 'ping' 'setuid(ed)'<br>
                >>>>>>> What are 'routable'
                networks?<br>
                >>>>>>> What are 'non-routable'
                networks?<br>
                >>>>>>> What does it mean if you
                get and IP address like <a moz-do-not-send="true"
                  href="http://169.254.0.0/16" target="_blank">169.254.0.0/16</a><br>
                >>>>>>> Why do you always have a
                127.0.0.1 address in your boxes?<br>
                >>>>>>> Who defines (and where are
                the documents that define) all these<br>
                >>>>>>> protocols? (RFC anyone?)<br>
                >>>>>>><br>
                >>>>>>><br>
                >>>>>>> Michael Havens writes:<br>
                >>>>>>>><br>
                >>>>>>>> okay, so I bought a
                used computer to do Linux from scratch on. Well,<br>
                >>>>>>>> I'm<br>
                >>>>>>>> going to ssh from my
                primary computer to the new computer but got a<br>
                >>>>>>>> 'Connection timed out'
                error. After googling for a bit I discovered<br>
                >>>>>>>> ufw was<br>
                >>>>>>>> to blame.<br>
                >>>>>>>> after I disabled the
                firewall I could ssh from 192.168.1.101<br>
                >>>>>>>> <parasite> to<br>
                >>>>>>>> 192.168.0.4
                <host><br>
                >>>>>>>> the error I got going
                the other way was the connection timed out<br>
                >>>>>>>> error:<br>
                >>>>>>>> ssh <a
                  moz-do-not-send="true"
                  href="mailto:mike@192.168.1.101">mike@192.168.1.101</a><br>
                >>>>>>>> ssh: connect to host
                192.168.1.101 port 22: Connection timed out<br>
                >>>>>>>> After googling some
                more I thought perhaps openssh-server wasn't<br>
                >>>>>>>> installed... but it is.
                So please.... what is the problem? I verifed<br>
                >>>>>>>> openssh-client is
                installed but I don't know what it could be. Could<br>
                >>>>>>>> you<br>
                >>>>>>>> help me out?<br>
                >>>>>>>> :-)~MIKE~(-:<br>
                >>>>>>><br>
                >>>>>>>
                ---------------------------------------------------<br>
                >>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list -
                <a moz-do-not-send="true"
                  href="mailto:PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org">PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org</a><br>
                >>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe,
                or to change your mail settings:<br>
                >>>>>>> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss"
                  target="_blank">http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss</a><br>
                >>>>>><br>
                >>>>>><br>
                >>>>><br>
                >>>>><br>
                >>>>><br>
                >>>>>
                ---------------------------------------------------<br>
                >>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - <a
                  moz-do-not-send="true"
                  href="mailto:PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org">PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org</a><br>
                >>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to
                change your mail settings:<br>
                >>>>> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
                  href="http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss"
                  target="_blank">http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss</a><br>
                >>>>><br>
                >>>>><br>
                >>>>><br>
                >>>>>
                ---------------------------------------------------<br>
                >>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - <a
                  moz-do-not-send="true"
                  href="mailto:PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org">PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org</a><br>
                >>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to
                change your mail settings:<br>
                >>>>> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
                  href="http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss"
                  target="_blank">http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss</a><br>
                >>>><br>
                >>>><br>
                >>><br>
                >><br>
                ><br>
                ><br>
                > ---------------------------------------------------<br>
                > PLUG-discuss mailing list - <a
                  moz-do-not-send="true"
                  href="mailto:PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org">PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org</a><br>
                > To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail
                settings:<br>
                > <a moz-do-not-send="true"
                  href="http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss"
                  target="_blank">http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss</a><br>
                ---------------------------------------------------<br>
                PLUG-discuss mailing list - <a moz-do-not-send="true"
                  href="mailto:PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org">PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org</a><br>
                To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail
                settings:<br>
                <a moz-do-not-send="true"
                  href="http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss"
                  target="_blank">http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss</a><br>
              </div>
            </div>
          </blockquote>
        </div>
        <br>
      </div>
      <br>
      <fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
      <br>
      <pre wrap="">---------------------------------------------------
PLUG-discuss mailing list - <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org">PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org</a>
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss">http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss</a></pre>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
  </body>
</html>