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 <bmike1@gmail.com> 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 <bmike1@gmail.com> 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 <bmike1@gmail.com> 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 <jmcphe@gmail.com> wrote:
ipconfig /all
--
:-)~MIKE~(-:



--
:-)~MIKE~(-:



--
:-)~MIKE~(-:



--
:-)~MIKE~(-: