hmmmmmm.... I just tried it and it responded that I have to specify the protocol (tcp/udp) when opening multiple ports. Now I need to ask what to do because I don't know which goes to which. I think that they are all tcp but am unsure. On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 10:44 AM, Michael Havens wrote: > look what I found in my quest to open ports for printing: I found a > program called ufw which is a 'program for managing a netfilter > firewall.' And one of the commands is: > > ufw allow 53 > This rule will allow tcp and udp port 53 to any address on this > host. > > Which is the printers port?... of course 631. my search engine is givong > me another: 515? But both of my computers print. > Do you know if I can specify more than one port in the command? oops... I > just found the correct syntax: > ufw allow 18:25,50:110,130:150,389:445, > 631,900:1000,5800:5900,8080,9418 > the man page says I'm allowed 15 numbers in there. No spaces, separated by > a coma, and ranges (x:y ) count as two numbers. > > What other ports does the great brain known as PLUG believe is good to > open? > I think ufw is basically a program to make iptables easier. Or do you > want to give me a tutelage on iptables. I'm willing if you are! Does anyone > have any pointers about ufw? > > ufw probably is an acronym for unix fire wall. or perhaps ubuntu fire > wall. > > > On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 8:58 AM, Michael Havens wrote: > >> hmmmm..... I just remembered. I had another distro installed when it was >> printing from the XP which means the xp has never been printing with ubuntu. >> >> >> On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 4:43 PM, Michael Havens wrote: >> >>> thank you..... it says it is on the 24 subet (225.225.225.0) as are all >>> the other computers. That isn't default, is it? The way i'm looking at this >>> (the way I think I understand it is: >>> 8bits.8bits.8bits.0-255 >>> /8 . /16 ./24 . 0 >>> 255.255.255.0/24 >>> 255.255.0.0/16 >>> 255.0.0.0/8 >>> Is my understanding right or reverse of how it works. Yeah.... I just >>> reread one of your posts with this understanding and I;m pretty sure that >>> is correct. >>> >>> On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 4:19 PM, James Mcphee wrote: >>> >>>> ipconfig /all >>>> >>> -- >>> :-)~MIKE~(-: >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> :-)~MIKE~(-: >> > > > > -- > :-)~MIKE~(-: > -- :-)~MIKE~(-: